


HI 



Hi 



111 I 1 

H 




■ mm 

SHI 

■j 

H 




1 
1 

9 



B 

fm 

■ 



■ ■ 
■ 
■ 







UN HI 



i«h 



ota 





■n sh 

HP;**) Kb B 

M M 

■HI 

HHdHbbB Hh 




Glass 

Book 



COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT 



William Dunlap 



*A Study of his J^ife and 
Works and of his T'lace 
in Contemporary Culture 



Oral Sumner Coad, Ph.D. 




William Dunlap 






William Dunlap 

*A Study of his J^ife 

and Works and of his TO* lace in 

Contemporary Qulture 



By 

Oral Sumner Coad, Ph.D, 



NEW YORK 

THE DUNLAP SOCIETY 

M CM XVII 



T 6 



r 



' i 



Copyright, 191 7, by 
The Dunlap Society 






a 



4S-- 



70)65 



•JUL -2 1917 



This is one of an edition of four hundred and twenty-three 

copies printed from type for The Dunlap Society 

in the month of June, 191 7, by 

The DeVinne Press 




Contents! 

PAGE 

Chapter I 3 

Biography from 1/66 to 1805 

1 Youth and Early Plays. 
11 The American Theatre in the Eighteenth 

Century, 
in Career as a Theatrical Manager. 

Chapter II 82 

Biography from 1805 to 1839 

1 Second Connection with the Theatre and 

State Position. 
11 Career as a Professional Painter, 
in Last Years. 

Chapter III 129 

The Original Plays 

1 American Drama before 1790. 
11 Dunlap's Plays, 
in His Place in American Drama. 

Chapter IV 193 

The Dramatic Translations 

1 From the French. 
11 From Kotzebue. 
in From Other German Playwrights. 



Contents 



PAGE 



Chapter V 244 

The Non-Dramatic Writings 

1 Biographies. 

11 Histories, 
in Journalism, 
iv A Novel. 

Chapter VI 280 

Conclusion 

Lists of Dunlap's Writings and 
Paintings 284 

Index 303 



[viii] 






JLijst of 3!Uu0ttatiott!S 



William Dunlap frontispiece 

Engraving in mezzotint by Max Rosenthal, from a 
portrait by Ingham, painted in 1838 



facing page 

The artist displaying one of his paintings to his 
parents 16 

By William Dunlap 

(From the original picture painted in 1788 and now in the 
possession of The New York Historical Society) 



William Dunlap 96 

From a rare contemporary lithograph 
(Now in the collection of William B. Osgood Field) 

Townsend Harris's Receipt from William Dunlap 
for his copy of the " History of the American 
Theatre" 112 

(Now in the collection of William B. Osgood Field) 

Charles Brockden Brown 248 

From a miniature by William Dunlap, about 1806 
(Now in the possession of Herbert Lee Pratt) 



[«] 



preface 

The last few years have seen a noticeable quick- 
ening of interest in early American drama. This 
is not at all surprising, for the field is one of much 
attractiveness from the antiquarian point of view, 
even though the plays themselves are not of high 
excellence. In any consideration of the subject, 
William Dunlap must be given a prominent place. 
As a playwright and manager, he was the dom- 
inating personage in our theatrical affairs at the 
end of the eighteenth century. But he was more 
than this. He was a biographer and historian, he 
was in some measure a journalist and novelist, 
and he was very much of a painter. In short, he 
participated in nearly all the cultural activities of 
his day. For a study of so important a figure 
there is ample justification. 

It is my purpose in the following pages, first of 
all to present as complete an account of Dunlap's 
life as the available material will permit. In this 
connection his work as a theatrical manager and 
as an artist will be discussed. Then his writings, 
particularly his dramatic writings, will be ex- 
amined in detail in an effort to estimate his con- 
tribution to the literature of his generation. 
Throughout the book I shall have a good deal to 
say about the early culture of this country, both 
as a background for Dunlap's undertakings and as 



preface 

a means of pointing out his services to the in- 
tellectual development of the new nation. 

The existing material bearing on his life is at 
best limited, and for me it has been limited further 
still. The owner of seven of the eleven known 
volumes of Dunlap's manuscript Diary has been 
unwilling to give me access to them, and thus a 
possible source of information has been cut off. 
However, if one may judge from the four avail- 
able volumes, the other seven contain details which 
would amplify, but in no way alter, the outline of 
his life as presented elsewhere. 

It is a pleasure to acknowledge my obligation to 
those who have helped to make this book possible. 
Among the members of the Columbia faculty I 
wish to thank especially Professor W. P. Trent, 
under whose direction this investigation has been 
conducted; and Professor A. H. Thorndike, Pro- 
fessor Brander Matthews, and Dr. Carl Van 
Doren, who have given much valuable advice. 
They have also assisted by reading manuscript and 
proof. Dr. Frederick W. Atkinson, President of the 
Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute, has cordially per- 
mitted me the use of his splendid collection of early 
American plays. Mr. Oscar Wegelin, by his bibli- 
ographies and his personal suggestions, has dis- 
tinctly facilitated my task. To the courtesy of 
the Columbia, Yale, and Brown librarians, and also 
those of the New York Historical Society, the New 
York Public Library, and the Society Library, 
I am very deeply indebted. In studying Dunlap as 
a painter I have been greatly aided by the Mac- 

Cxii] 



preface 

beth Gallery and the Ehrich Galleries, by The Play- 
ers, by Mr. Thomas B. Clarke and Mr. Charles 
Henry Hart, as well as by Professor Theodore S. 
Woolsey of Yale University. To my wife, who 
has given generous and varied assistance, and to 
Mr. Evert Jansen Wendell, whose interest and en- 
couragement have been one of the most pleasant 
features of the work, I owe a peculiar debt of 
gratitude. 

Oral Sumner Coad. 

New York City, April 7, 191 7. 



[xiii] 



I 



William Dunlap 



William ©unlap 



CHAPTER I 
Biography from 1766 to 1805 



WHEN General Wolfe came to the Western 
Hemisphere to wrest Canada from the 
French, there accompanied him in the ranks of the 
47th regiment, known as "Wolfe's Own/' a young 
Irishman named Samuel Dunlap. Our informa- 
tion regarding his family is meagre. We know 
only that he was the son of a Londonderry mer- 
chant, that he had three sisters, and that the pater- 
nal name was originally Dunlop. At the battle of 
Quebec he carried the colors, and mingled his 
blood with that of his commander on the Plains of 
Abraham. Subsequently the young soldier re- 
ceived a lieutenant's commission from General 
Amherst, and served through the remainder of the 
French war. After the British triumph, his regi- 
ment was stationed at Perth Amboy in the colony 
of New Jersey. Here Lieutenant Dunlap fell in 
love with Margaret Sargeant, a native of New 
Jersey of English descent. The lure of Hymen 
proving stronger than the lure of Mars, Dunlap 
3 



4 i©ifliam SDuniap 

sold his commission, married Miss Sargeant, and 
established himself as a storekeeper in the town. 1 

Perth Amboy then contained not more than 
three hundred houses, but it could boast consider- 
able prosperity and importance. Admirably located 
on a fine harbor at the junction of the Raritan 
River and Staten Island Sound, it had become the 
capital of the province, a garrison town, and a 
social center for the New Jersey aristocracy. 2 

On the 19th of February, 1766, a son— their 
first and only child— was born to Samuel and Mar- 
garet Dunlap. Him they christened William. 
"Among my earliest recollections," he wrote in 
after life, "are those connected with sickness, and 
the relief derived from being carried in the arms 
of my father." 3 

William's education was begun by his mother. 
But while yet in petticoats, he was sent to learn his 
letters at a dame-school, kept by Mrs. Randall, and 
thence was transferred to the strap and ferule of 
Master McNaughton, a black-looking Irishman. 
His more regular tuition started under Thomas 
Johnston, an Oxonian who was engaged in 1774 to 

1 "New York Mirror," Vol. X, p. 265 ; Dunlap, "History 
of the American Theatre," New York edition, p. 233, and 
"History of the Rise and Progress of the Arts of Design 
in the United States," Vol. I, p. 244. Unless otherwise in- 
dicated, the information in this chapter is obtained from 
the latter two works. See autobiographical section in 
each. 

2 W. A. Whitehead, "Contributions to the Early History 
of Perth Amboy and Adjoining Counties," New York, 
1856, Chapter III. 

3 "American Theatre," p. 233. 



25xograpljp from 1 ?fi0 to 1 Bfl5 5 

teach the youth of Perth Amboy. While a new 
school-house, toward which Samuel Dunlap con- 
tributed six pounds, was building, classes were 
held in the court-house. The hours of instruction 
were 6 to 8, 10 to 12, and 3 to 6. 4 

For companions William had the family slaves, 
who petted, indulged, and spoiled him; and the 
soldiers of his father's old regiment, with whom 
the boy was a great favorite. But his chief friend 
and instructor was Thomas Bartow, "an aged man 
who lived almost the life of a hermit, having 
neither wife nor child." 5 He was a man of some 
means and occupied a comfortable house, sur- 
rounded by a fruit garden very attractive to a 
small boy. It was the only house in town without 
slaves. Between this old solitary and the child 
there grew up a close intimacy, productive of much 
good to one of them at least. William was per- 
mitted every Sunday to visit his venerable friend, 
with whom he was always sure of a welcome. The 
house and garden were at the youngster's com- 
mand, and sometimes he achieved the dignity of 
riding behind "old Sorrel." From the lips of 
Thomas Bartow he first heard the stories of Troy 
and Latium, of Heaven and Hell, as commentaries 
on the pictures which excited his admiration in the 
old man's Homer and Vergil and Milton. Thus 
began the love of pictures and books which was to 
shape the lad's whole career. Soon he was able to 
read for himself, and Bartow's library became his 

4 Whitehead, pp. 291-3 ; "Arts of Design," Vol. I, p. 247. 

5 "American Theatre," p. 234. 



6 JMiiam 2DunIap 

delight. At the beginning of the Revolution Bar- 
tow withdrew to Pennsylvania, and William saw 
him no more. But Dunlap never forgot his debt to 
this kindly preceptor of his youth, nor neglected 
the opportunity to express his obligation. 

In 1775, in company with his father, William 
first journeyed to New York. There he saw on 
every hand signs of the impending struggle. 
Weapons were for sale in the shop windows, and 
men were practising the use of arms in the streets. 
At Perth Amboy all was preparation for war. The 
townsmen formed themselves into a battalion. The 
boys in imitation organized a company, "The Gov- 
ernor's Guards," and paraded with wooden guns 
and swords. They assumed the character of 
rebels, and wore on their caps the motto, "Liberty 
or Death." Young William was a member of this 
band. 6 Whether his loyalist father gave him an 
object lesson in methods of quelling rebellion, he 
has not seen fit to record. 

The Continentals began filling the village; the 
British appeared on the shore of Staten Island ; a 
conflict was imminent. Accordingly the Dunlap 
family withdrew up the Raritan River to a place 
near New Brunswick. William spent the summer 
of 1776 in delicious freedom, rambling, fishing, 
swimming, and, rather precociously, reading Shake- 
speare and every other book he could lay his 
hands on. 

After the occupation of Perth Amboy by the 
British, the family returned and spent the winter 

• Whitehead, p. 328. 



2&iocra#>p fcom 1 7fifi to 1 SB5 7 

at home. Here William lived in the midst of sol- 
diers of divers nations, English, Highland, Hes- 
sian, who thronged his father's house ; and he saw 
all the abominations of a crowded camp. With 
admiring eyes he watched a detachment march 
proudly out of town to procure forage. As he re- 
called long after : 

"In the evening it was known that this gallant 
military array were returning, their wagons loaded 
with wounded, instead of the booty they went in 
search of. By the fireside I heard the heavy rum- 
bling of the wagons over the frozen earth, and the 
groans of those who were borne to the hospitals. 
I had now seen something of war." 7 

In the spring of 1777 Samuel Dunlap moved 
with his family to New York, the British head- 
quarters. The city was to be the field of the future 
writer and painter's major activities. He was to 
see it grow into a metropolis of 300,000, but in 
1777 New York was a town of not over 22,000 in- 
habitants. It stretched as far north as the present 
Grand Street in the older and more extensive east- 
ern section, but only as far as Duane Street on the 
west. Beyond were swamps, farms, and pastures 
in which the citizens kept their cows. Along the 
southwest shore of the island lay the Battery, an 
earthwork about 1450 feet long, founded on the 
rocks, and mounted with guns. Behind this wall 
stood Fort George, a substantial piece of masonry ; 
and immediately north of the fort was the Bowling 

7 "American Theatre," p. 237. 



8 i©tf liam 2Dunia$> 

Green, a small oval park. Perhaps the most im- 
portant and fashionable thoroughfare in the city 
was Wall Street. Queen Street (now Pearl) and 
Water Street were the main business sections, 
Broadway being of less prominence. The Bowery 
was a spacious avenue leading to the country, and 
lined with farm-houses and gardens. A number 
of the old Dutch houses, with gables to the street, 
were still to be found, but the prevailing type of 
residence was English. The city contained several 
fine mansions, surrounded by yards and gardens. 
The principal buildings were St. Paul's Church 
(Trinity was destroyed by fire in 1776), the City 
Hall, the Hospital, and King's College. 8 

Shortly after coming to New York, William wit- 
nessed his first play, "The Beaux' Stratagem." It 
was given by a company of English soldiers. But 
to him the actors were creatures of another world, 
and he abandoned himself to the splendid illusion. 

The boy was again put to school, first under a 
man named Leslie and then under Thomas Steele, 
a Quaker, until an unfortunate accident brought 
his school days to an abrupt termination. Among 
the Amboy families which had taken up residence 
in New York was that of Andrew Elliot. It con- 
tained a large brood of children. One day in the 
spring of 1778 William dined with them, and after 
dinner the boys engaged in a mimic battle of chips. 

s "American Theatre," pp. 3^-41 ; T. E. V. Smith, "The 
City of New York in the Year of Washington's Inaugura- 
tion, 1789," New York, 1889, Chapter I ; F. B. Hough, 
"Statistics of Population of the City and Countv of New 
York," New York, 1866. 



2Siograj>!)p from X 7 fiB to 1 Sti5 9 

A missile struck the guest's right eye. He was 
carried home and given careful treatment, but to 
no purpose, for the sight of the eye had been 
totally destroyed. By this mishap he was tem- 
porarily deprived of his three favorite amuse- 
ments : the theatre, reading, and drawing. 

His health restored, William began helping in 
the looking-glass and china store which his father 
had established in New York. Apparently his 
duties were not onerous, since he found time for 
much reading, the acquisition of a little French, 
and two attempts at dramatic composition,— one 
on the story of Abou Hassan in the "Arabian 
Nights," and the other a tragedy on some incidents 
in Persian history. He likewise tried copying 
prints, at which he gained so much proficiency 
that his father was impressed and sought out a 
teacher. The teacher disappeared after a few les- 
sons; but the boy thought he had learned enough 
art to attempt portraits, and he prevailed on his 
indulgent parent to act as his first subject. Soon 
he was sketching strangers in crayon at three 
guineas a head. Thus at the age of sixteen he 
became a professional portraitist. His first oil 
was a tavern sign representing Sir Samuel Hood, 
painted to attract the custom of sailors. 

The declaration of peace in 1783 left Dunlap 
free to return to his native State. Though he had 
passed the last six years in the stronghold of the 
loyalists, he emerged an ardent American. While 
visiting the Van Homes at Rocky Hill near Prince- 
ton, where Congress was sitting, his patriotism was 



io JBtfiiam SDunlap 

greatly stimulated by a sight of Washington. One 
day, as he walked between Princeton and Trenton, 
he saw a party of military horsemen approaching. 

"The center figure was the tallest of the group, 
and I knew that I saw in him the man on whom 
every thought centered. The eyes of the company 
were turned upon me as they approached. The 
salutation of taking off my cocked hat was per- 
formed with a feeling which probably my face ex- 
pressed. Instantly the salute was returned in the 
same manner by the chief, and every hat in the 
company was lowered with its waving plume to 
me. They passed, and I gazed after them. It was 
a precious moment. I had seen Washington." 9 

Dunlap was soon privileged to meet the great 
man on more intimate terms at the Van Home 
mansion. Washington commended him for his 
painting and his flute-playing, and the boy was 
supremely happy. At Mr. Van Home's request, 
General and Mrs. Washington sat for their por- 
traits. The result in the case of Washington was 
a very flat and wooden crayon picture, showing that 
the young artist had not yet mastered the secrets 
of perspective and characterization. 10 In the win- 
ter of 1783-4 he made a full-length oil portrait 
of Washington on the battle-field of Princeton, 
with much smoke and many soldiers in the back- 
ground. While thus engaged, Dunlap breakfasted 
and dined every day at headquarters with the 

9 "American Theatre," pp. 238-9. 

10 There is an engraving of this portrait by Augustus 
Robin. 



2&iograpl)p from 1?B0 to 1BA5 



ii 



Washingtons and members of Congress. Wash- 
ington impressed him as reserved but not austere, 
unaffectedly dignified and habitually polite. Once 
he saw the General laugh heartily when he rode in 
unexpectedly upon the portly John Van Home, 
who, having just finished a hard race with his pro- 
spective dinner in the shape of an elusive pig, rose 
from the struggle with the squealing animal in his 
arms to find himself face to face with the Com- 
mander in Chief. 

The elder Dunlap, with his usual indulgence, 
had decided that William should be sent to Lon- 
don, the Mecca of early American seekers after 
culture, to learn art under the great Benjamin 
West. The winter was spent in preparation which 
consisted of the study of French and dancing, and 
much attention to billiard-playing, card-parties, 
balls, and sleigh-rides. 

On the 4th of May, 1784, the aspirant sailed for 
England on the good ship Betsy, taking with him 
as credentials the full-length Washington and a 
copy from Copley. Upon his arrival at London 
about the middle of June, Dunlap hastened to in- 
troduce himself to West, and to display his pictures, 
which were mildly praised. He established him- 
self in two rooms in Rathbone Place, and after a 
sufficiency of sight-seeing, settled to sketching 
from a pair of busts. The drawings gained him 
permission to enter the academy at Somerset 
House, a privilege of which he did not avail him- 
self because of bashfulness. When winter came 
he reveled in the theatres and saw most of the sue- 



i2 fMliam SDutrfap 

cessful dramas of the day, including "The School 
for Scandal" and "The Critic" with the original 
casts. The Bannisters, Kemble, Mrs. Jordan, and 
Henderson were his admiration, but to the divine 
Siddons he paid complete homage. "At this time," 
he said, "she was in her prime, and her face and 
figure as perfect as her acting." 11 

So far as art study was concerned, Dunlap pro- 
tested that he accomplished almost nothing the 
first year, partly because of the attraction of other 
interests, partly because of a protracted illness from 
abscesses. With the return of health came an over- 
flow of spirits. He was eager for any indulgence 
his friends might suggest, and the theatre, excur- 
sions, port wine, and dinners occupied his days 
and nights. Among his associates in frivolity 
West's son, Raphael, was one of the most intimate. 
The American fell in with an eating and drinking 
club, with which he became a favorite because of 
his wit and ability to sing a good song. Benjamin 
West, whom he now saw only on rare occasions, 
finding him indifferent to art, abandoned him to 
his fate. 

During his sojourn in England, Dunlap made 
only two trips into the interior. With a friend he 
visited Stamford in Lincolnshire, where he saw 
some fine pictures at the near-by Burleigh House. 
The natives were astonished to find an American 
who was neither black nor copper-colored. In the 
autumn of 1786 he undertook a walking expedition 
to Oxford with Samuel L. Mitchill, a New Yorker 

11 "American Theatre," p. 241. 



Sfriograpfjp from 1 ?fiB to XHH5 1 3 

who had just completed a medical course at Edin- 
burgh. Equipped with the absolute necessities, 
they set out on a rainy morning in November. 
Over heavy roads they trudged with light hearts 
to the ancient university town. They were warmly 
received by the students, to whom two genuine 
Americans were objects of no little interest. They 
dined in the college halls, drank wine in the 
students' chambers, were shown about the town, 
and in general learned "as much of Univer- 
sity life as a week's residence could teach" them. 12 
A day was spent at Marlborough's estate, Blen- 
heim, which contained an excellent collection of 
the works of Rubens and other great painters. 
The return trip was accomplished on foot via 
Windsor, where the king and royal family were 
gazed upon in the chapel. 

Apparently the elder Dunlap had begun to sus- 
pect that his son was enjoying a rare good time at 
his expense without achieving the object for which 
he was sent. In consequence an unexpected sum- 
mons caused William to embark for his native land 
in August, 1787. The voyage required seven 
weeks, which he whiled away by making portraits 
of the captain, and by helping to repaint the ship's 
figure-head. The traveler returned but little wiser 
and less stalwart in character than when he left, so 
he frankly admitted. Indeed, so far as art study 
was concerned, he seems to have done little enough 
during his three years abroad. Had he applied 
himself diligently to his easel and taken more ad- 

12 "American Theatre," p. 244. 



14 f©fliiam SDunlap 

vantage of the instruction and guidance which 
West freely offered, he undoubtedly would have 
been a much better painter than he ever became. 
Yet in spite of indolence, the foreign residence 
formed a valuable part of Dunlap's preparation 
for after life. He did not entirely neglect art ; and 
he profited greatly by the opportunity to study 
West's methods, which he later imitated with some 
success. By viewing numerous collections of the 
masters, he acquired a more accurate standard for 
self-criticism than he could have obtained in this 
country. His frequent attendance at the theatre 
was invaluable to the future director of the New 
York stage. Not only did he become familiar 
with the best contemporary plays and actors, but 
also with methods of presentation. As important 
a gain as any was the broadened outlook on the 
world's culture, without which he would have been 
but ill prepared to direct, as in some slight measure 
he one day was to direct, the culture of the new 
nation. If his character suffered some bumps and 
bruises in the process, the injury was not irrepa- 
rable, for his later life was as impeccable as one 
could desire. 

Back in New York, Dunlap installed himself in 
his father's house as a portrait painter, an occupa- 
tion which did not seriously interfere with his 
leisure, though he was almost the only portraitist 
the city possessed. The theatre claimed his major 
interest and soon enlisted his pen. The glories of 
the English stage were fresh in his memory, and 
the recent success of 'The Contrast" by the Ameri- 



2&tO0ra#>pfroml?fifitolBfl5 15 

can Tyler 13 was still a subject of comment. Thus 
doubly inspired, Dunlap, in the course of a few 
weeks, composed "The Modest Soldier ; or, Love in 
New York," a five-act comedy. His friends praised 
it warmly. Undoubtedly it would prove a triumph 
on the boards. But the problem was "to approach 
those awful personages, the managers." The gap 
was bridged by the good offices of an English 
actor then residing in New York. To him the play 
was read over a bottle of Madeira, and pro- 
nounced, perhaps in consideration of the bottle, 
"excellent, wanted a little pruning, but far less 
than 'She Stoops to Conquer/ when Goldsmith 
read it to us in the green-room." 14 An introduc- 
tion to the managers, Hallam and Henry, was now 
forthcoming. The comedy was read to them and 
accepted. Yet its appearance was postponed from 
month to month, much to the author's mystification 
until he discovered the reason to be that there were 
no parts suited to Henry and his wife. Thus 
ended the first chapter of Dunlap's dramatic 
career. 

But he did not entirely forsake his studio. One 
product of this period still survives in the collec- 
tion of the New York Historical Society, a paint- 
ing made in 1788 which represents himself 
showing a picture to his parents. It is a poorly 
drawn affair, yet it is interesting as an early por- 
trait of the painter. At this time also he took up 
etching, a branch of art of which he made very 

13 See post, pp. 133 ff. 

14 "American Theatre," pp. 77-8. 



1 6 iBfliiam SDimiap 

little use; but when Tyler's "Contrast" was pub- 
lished in 1790, it contained as frontispiece a badly 
drawn Dunlap etching of one of the scenes. 

Possessing as he did the power to attract people 
of widely different temperaments, William Dun- 
lap was always blest with numerous good friends. 
Soon after his return from England he became a 
member of the Philological Society, a literary or- 
ganization formed for mutual instruction and im- 
provement, — then a popular type of social group. 
Among his fellow-members were Noah Webster, 
and Samuel Mitchill. This association stimulated 
in him more regular habits of study and a desire 
for literary achievement. He planned an epic on 
Aristomenes and wrote some hundred verses. 
But other friends he had, of a less serious turn of 
mind, who persuaded him to join the Masons and 
the Black Friars. The latter was a society estab- 
lished in 1784 for social, charitable, and humane 
purposes ; but its influence, as well as that of the 
Masons, would seem to have been not altogete * 
on the side of virtue, for Dunlap said he was saved 
from their contamination only by marriage. 15 , v 

The "New York Daily Gazette" of Monday, 
February 16, 1789, contained this news item: 

"On Tuesday last was married, by the Revd. Mr. 
Moore, Mr. William Dunlap, an eminent Por- 
trait Painter, and Member of the Philological So- 
ciety, only son of Mr. Samuel Dunlap, Merchant, 

13 "New York Directory," 1793, P- 235 ; "Arts of De- 
sign," Vol. I, p. 267. 




The artipt displaying one of his paintings to his parents 

By William Dunlap 



25iostapl)p ftom l?fifi to 1B05 1 7 

Queen- Street, to the amiable and accomplished 
Miss Nabby Woolsey, of Fairfield, in Connecti- 
cut." 

Miss Nabby, Betsey, or Elizabeth Woolsey was 
descended from an old New York family, the 
English founder of which came to New Amster- 
dam in 1623, and became a prosperous trader. Of 
this line was Benjamin Woolsey, who graduated 
from Yale, and reared a large family, including 
Elizabeth, born in 1768. He died in 1771, leaving 
the family in financial embarrassment. 16 Dunlap's 
marriage brought him into association with Eliza- 
beth's brother-in-law, Timothy Dwight, later presi- 
dent of Yale. From him Dunlap received much 
intellectual inspiration. Thanks to the new re- 
lationships, he was now saved from "inevitable de- 
struction." 17 

About this time the Philological Society died, 
and from its ashes sprang the Friendly Club, which 
became one of the leading literary circles of New 
York. It numbered among its members Elihu 
Hubbard Smith, William Johnson, Samuel Latham 
Mitchill, Samuel Miller, Anthony Bleecker, 
William Walton Woolsey, John Wells, James 
Kent, and William Dunlap. Nearly all these 
young men were college graduates with a strong 

16 For genealogy of the Woolsey family see Walter 
Barrett, "The Old Merchants of New York City," New 
York, 1885; Benjamin W. Dwight, "History of the De- 
scendants of John Dwight of Dedham, Massachusetts," 
New York, 1874; Elizabeth Woolsey Howland, "Family 
Records," 1900. 

17 "Arts of Design," Vol. I, p. 267. 



1 8 i©fliiam SDunlap 

interest in cultural pursuits, and their influence 
on the development of Dunlap's mind must have 
been very beneficial. 18 The club, which was rather 
typical of those organizations by which our early 
citizens sought to appease their intellectual crav- 
ings, met every Tuesday evening at the homes of 
the members in rotation. The host read from a 
favorite author and directed a discussion of the 
passage, after which light refreshments were 
served. It is said that George Washington was a 
frequent visitor at these weekly sessions. The 
Friendlies projected several literary works, and 

18 This group was unusual in the distinctions which 
came to its members subsequently. Smith became the 
center of the literary society of New York. He pub- 
lished several works, and as a physician helped found, 
and for a time edited, the "Medical Repository." Johnson 
was a lawyer, and was for many years the reporter for 
the Supreme Court of the State. He was a classical 
scholar and editor of legal works. Mitchill was a phy- 
sician, surgeon-general of the State, a scientist of emi- 
nence, a professor at Columbia, a United States senator, 
a man of advanced ideas, a leader in all civic and philan- 
thropic enterprises, and the author of several works. 
Miller became a prominent theologian and polemical 
writer, and a professor at Princeton. Bleecker was a 
lawyer, a prolific contributor to periodicals, a founder of 
the New York Historical Society, a patron of arts and 
letters, and a leader in public affairs. Woolsey was Dun- 
lap's brother-in-law. He entered the hardware business, 
and became a wealthy man. He was the father of Theo- 
dore Dwight Woolsey, president of Yale. Wells was a 
prominent lawyer who was associated with Hamilton in 
bringing out the "Federalist." Kent gained more perma- 
nent distinction than any other member of the club. As 
chief justice of the Supreme Court of the State, and 
chancellor of New York, and as the author of "Commen- 
taries on American Law," he was one of the t chief found- 
ers of American jurisprudence. 



25iograpl)p from 1 ?fifi to 1 0fl5 1 9 

actually maintained at different times a magazine 
and a review, to both of which Dunlap contributed. 
The society continued its existence until anni- 
hilated by political differences about 1800. 19 

Dunlap's first ill-fated attempt at drama had 
met with sufficient praise to call forth a second 
comedy, written sometime in 1788. Having 
parts suited to Henry and his wife, it was readily 
accepted by that gentleman, and exposed to the 
smoky glare of the tallow footlights in the fall of 
1789. The newspaper advertisement was thus 
worded : 

The public are refpectfully informed that the 
THEATRE will be opened on MONDAY, the 7th 
of September, with a COMEDY, never yet per- 
formed, (written by a gentleman of this city), 
called, 

The FATHER, 

Or, American Shandyifm. 

The Prologue by Mr. WIGNELL.— The Epilogue 

by Mrs. HENRY. 
To which will be added a FARCE, called, 

Who's the Dupe. 

HALLAM and HENRY. 20 

19 See "American Theatre," p. 114; "New York Mir- 
ror," Vol. X, p. 265 ; Martha J. Lamb, "History of the 
City of New York: Its Origin, Rise and Progress," New 
York and Chicago, 1877-80, Vol. II, p. 519; "Monthly 
Recorder," April, 1813; James Grant Wilson, "Memorial 
History of the City of New York," New York, 1893, Vol. 
IV, p. 233. Mrs. Lamb, Vol. II, p. 468, speaks also of a 
Drone Club to which Dunlap belonged at about this time, 
with almost the same membership as the Friendly Club. 

20 "Daily Advertiser," September 5, 1789. 



20 i©illiam SDunlap 

The play was glowingly announced by the 
"Daily Gazette" of August 26: 

"The town is, at present, in very great expecta- 
tion of seeing a comedy, now in rehearsal, which is 
a production of a gentleman in this place, much 
celebrated for his wit and humor ; besides his great 
ability in the Dramatick, he has a peculiar talent in 
the Lyrick way of writing, and that in a manner 
wholly new and unknown. As soon as three 
hundred Shandean subscribers are obtained, the 
work will be put to the press." 

"The Father" was given seven times altogether, 
which was doing very well for an American 
play. 21 Except "The Contrast," no other had fared 
so well; according to existing standards, there- 
fore, it was a success. Dunlap said the flattering 
reception of the comedy fixed his attention upon 
drama. He may even have meditated becoming 
an actor; in the opinion of Ireland he probably 
would have done so but for the loss of his eye. 

21 Given four times in quick succession at New York ; 
appeared at Philadelphia in February, 1790, and again in 
January, 1791 ; and at Baltimore in September, 1790. My 
information concerning the performance of Dunlap's 
plays throughout this chapter is obtained from his "Amer- 
ican Theatre"; from G. O. Seilhamer, "History of the 
American Theatre," Philadelphia, 1888-91, Vols. I, II, III ; 
J. N. Ireland, "Records of the New York Stage from 
1750 to i860," New York, 1866, Vols. I, II ; and especially 
from the contemporary issues of the "New York Gazette," 
the "Evening Post," and the "Commercial Advertiser." 
For the publication of Dunlap's plays see bibliography, 
post, pp. 284 ff. 



2&iogra#)p from 1 7 fifi to 1 B05 2 1 

Duyckinck is my authority for the statement that 
he actually appeared on the stage once about 
1795.22 

The budding dramatist was now in some de- 
mand as a writer of theatrical pieces. Aside from 
two prologues in the fall of 1789, he wrote, at the 
request of the comedian Wignell, an interlude 
called "Darby's Return," which was given at the 
actor's benefit on November 24. 23 This trifle has 
become associated with Washington because of 
the author's careful account of its effect on him 
when he attended its representation. At the lines 
alluding to the new Federal Constitution, the great 
man deigned to smile. When he himself became 
the subject of Darby's narrative, "the president 
looked serious; and when Kathleen asked, 'How 
looked he, Darby? Was he short or tall?' his 
countenance showed embarrassment, from the ex- 
pectation of one of those eulogiums which he 
had been obliged to hear on many public occasions, 
and which must doubtless have been a severe trial 
to his feelings; but Darby's answer that he had 
not seen him, because he had mistaken a man 'all 
lace and glitter, botherum and shine' for him until 
all the show had passed, relieved the hero from 
apprehension of further personality, and he in- 

22 Introduction to the play in the "Dramatic Works of 
William Dunlap," Vol. I; Ireland, Vol. I, p. 80; Evert 
A. Duyckinck, "Cyclopaedia of American Literature," 
Philadelphia, 1881, Vol. I, p. 560. 

23 Performed three or four times at New York, once 
as late as November, 1796; given twice at Philadelphia, in 
1790 and 1791. 



22 i©ifliam SDunlaj* 

dulged in that which was with him extremely rare, 
a hearty laugh." 24 

Ever since his return from England, portrait- 
painting had been Dunlap's ostensible occupation, 
but his sitters, never numerous, were becoming 
fewer, and it was painfully apparent that art as a 
means of livelihood for the young couple must be 
abandoned. Play-writing was still more pre- 
carious. Again Samuel Dunlap came to the aid of 
his son by taking him into his business as a 
partner. Thus the devotee of art and letters be- 
came transformed into a storekeeper. 25 That 
Samuel had prospered as an importer of china 
and looking-glasses is evident from his ability to 
maintain the old homestead in Perth Amboy, to 
send William abroad for three years, and subse- 
quently to support an artist and his family in the 
household. The nature of the stock which William 
was now called upon to handle may be seen from 
the firm's advertisement: 

Samuel Dunlap, and Son, 
No. 13, Queen Street, have for fale, 
An afjortment of cut and plain Glafs 
VASE LAMPS, LOOKING GLASSES, 
and affortment of China, including table 
fets, tea fets, &c. An affortment of green 
and blue edged Ware, in fets or feparate. 
Hyfon and Souchong tea. 26 

24 "American Theatre," pp. 84-5. 

25 The change probably occurred early in 1790, since the 
New York Directory for 1789 mentions the store as 
Samuel Dunlap's, and for 1790 as Dunlap & Son's. 

26 "Daily Advertiser," October 21, 1790. 



25iograptjp from 1 Tfifi to 1 H05 2 3 

This partnership was terminated within two 
years by the death of the senior member. The ex- 
act date of this event I have not been able to learn, 
but the will was probated on January 4, 1792, 
which indicates that he died at the close of the 
previous year. 27 With his father Dunlap lost his 
truest friend. Always solicitous for his welfare 
and progress, confident of his ability, and patient 
with his failures, Samuel Dunlap gave his son 
every opportunity to make the most of himself. 

The business was now conducted by the remain- 
ing partner alone for a short time. About the 
beginning of 1793 one of the Woolseys was taken 
into the firm, and he continued his connection for 
three years. In 1796 he was supplanted by Moses 
Judah. 28 The business may have been partly of 
an itinerant nature ; at any rate, Dunlap made oc- 
casional visits to Boston, Philadelphia, and other 
cities for commercial purposes. 

One of his first acts after his father's death 
was to free the family slaves, retaining some as 
hired servants. He was active in the Manumission 
Society, and this deed proved the sincerity of his 
pretensions. In 1793 he became a trustee of the 
free school for African children. 29 This institu- 
tion was founded in 1789 by the Manumission So- 
ciety. In 1793 its enrollment was eighty- two. A 

27 "Collections of the New York Historical Society for 
1005/' P- 191- The will left everything to the testator's 
wife. 

28 See directories for those years. 

29 Directory for 1793. 



24 IMIiam SDuniap 

master and mistress were appointed to teach the 
"three R's" and domestic pursuits to negro children 
of both sexes. A board of twelve trustees was 
chosen from the society, whose duty it was to 
inspect the school every month, and recommend 
such measures as seemed necessary. 30 

Dunlap had now become a paterfamilias. The 
first child, John Alexander Bredin, was born De- 
cember 14, 1789. Margaret Ann was born April 
15, 1791 ; and a second daughter, Hester Mary, 
was born August 26, 1792, but lived only a year. 31 

A very important event in Dunlap's biography 
was the arrival of Charles Brockden Brown from 
Philadelphia in 1793. He was soon taken into 
the Friendly Club, and between him and Dunlap 
developed a life-long friendship. Brown was 
twenty-two years old, weak in body but very alert 
in mind, full of literary ambition and radical ideas. 
He took up residence with E. H. Smith and 
William Johnson in bachelor quarters, the resort 
of the Friendlies. He divided his time among his 
friends, "sleeping at Bachelor's Hall, and other- 
wise domesticated in the family of the author of 
'The Father'; until a long and severe illness 
rendered it necessary to remove him altogether to 
the house of the latter." 32 A close bond of fel- 
lowship was formed among these four young men, 
and especially between Brown and Dunlap, who 

30 "New York Magazine ; or, Literary Repository," Vol. 
IV, p. 258. 

31 Dunlap family Bible. 

32 "American Theatre," pp. 143-4. 



2&iograp ftp from 1 7tt to 1 BII5 2 5 

not only lived so intimately in New York, but also 
frequently summered together at Perth Amboy. 33 

Dunlap's commercial, benevolent, and social ac- 
tivities did not curb his dramatic endeavors. In 
the spring of 1793 "The Miser's Wedding," a 
comedy, "was played without study or rehearsal. 
. . . The piece was murdered (it deserved death) 
and never heard of more." 34 On the 24th of 
April, 1794, a tragedy, "The Fatal Deception; or, 
The Progress of Guilt," written in 1790, was 
brought out before a large and favorably dis- 
posed audience. 35 It was given for the benefit of 
John Hodgkinson. As an additional attraction the 
playwright composed an interlude, "Shelty's 
Travels," which was spoken by the actor on this 
occasion, and continued in use as late as 1802. 

Dunlap's literary adventures were not con- 
fined to the drama. He also essayed poetry and 
gained some slight distinction, since two of his 
poems were included beside the work of Joel Bar- 
low and Philip Freneau in a volume of "American 
Poems, Selected and Original," edited by E. H. 
Smith and published at Litchfield, Connecticut, in 
1793. These two poems reappeared the next year 
in "The Columbian Muse," printed at New York. 
One was "Cololoo— An Indian Tale" of thirty 

33 Dunlap, "Life of Brown," Philadelphia edition, Vol. 
I, P- 56. 

34 "American Theatre," p. 103. It was sometimes re- 
ferred to as "The Wedding." 

35 Repeated in May, given at Philadelphia the next 
October, and revived at New York in April, 1795, with 
considerable alteration. 



26 SEHHiam SDimlaj* 

quatrains; the other, "Ella— A Norwegian Tale," 
of about the same length. Both are smooth and 
rather spirited, but labored and artificial in diction. 
Two stanzas from "Ella" will illustrate: 

"Bright came the morn ! and bright in batter' d arms 
The rustic vet'rans came ; 
And many a youth, untried in rough alarms, 
Now hop'd a patriot's name. 

- They hear'd from far the hum of Sivard's host; 
Young Eric struck his shield; 
Then high in air his heavy spear he tost, 
And blaz'd along the field." 

Dunlap was now well launched on the career 
of a dramatist. Already he had given the stage 
more plays than any other native writer, and 
from this time on for a decade he was to re- 
main the most prolific contributor. In the middle 
of February, 1795, his second tragedy, "Fontain- 
ville Abbey," written the previous year, was pre- 
sented with Mr. and Mrs. Hodgkinson in the lead- 
ing parts. The staging seems to have been quite 
elaborate. The piece was not announced as the 
work of an American because the author felt that 
such an avowal would injure it. That Ameri- 
can contempt for the literature of this country 
was no idle fancy of Dunlap's was amply proved 
by the experience of many contemporary writers, 
dramatic and otherwise. As late as 1820 James 
Fenimore Cooper attempted to give currency to 
his first novel by publishing it as an English work, 



2&iograj% from 1 7 fifi to 1 Bfl5f 2 7 

American authors still being lightly esteemed. 
None the less, "Fontainville Abbey" was warmly 
praised ; writer, manager, actors, and scene-painter 
were all highly commended. On February 23 
it was repeated under very adverse circumstances. 
The villain was sick, and the actor who undertook 
the part was compelled to read his lines from the 
book, a procedure which naturally disconcerted the 
whole company. As if this were not a sufficient 
handicap, the fifth act was disturbed by an alarm 
of fire. At the third performance all this was 
changed; it was as perfectly represented, so it 
was said, as any tragedy seen on the New York 
stage for many years. 36 

Biographical information for this period is 
scant, but Dunlap was doubtless occupied for the 
greater part of the time in managing the store and 
in writing. Somewhere he had picked up a little 
German. In the "New York Magazine ; or, Liter- 
ary Repository" of December, 1795, appeared "The 
Zephyrs, An Idyl. (Translated from the German 
of Gesner [sic], by W. Dunlap.)" In the January 
number of the same publication was printed his 
translation of Gessner's "First Idyl." A sentence 
will show the quality of the rendering : 

"Let me the pitcher, too heavy a load for thee, 
to thy cottage carry." 

At this point in his career, Dunlap's affairs were 
in a promising condition. His financial circum- 

36 "New York Magazine ; or, Literary Repository," Vol. 
VI, pp. 67-9, 130. 



28 HEHftiam 2DimIa# 

stances were comfortable, he was gaining a name 
as a competent dramatist and man of letters, and 
he was enjoying the companionship of two friends, 
E. H. Smith and C. B. Brown, who were as much 
interested in literature as he. Smith was engaged 
in writing an opera, and Brown in projecting 
novels. Dunlap was also preparing an opera, 
"The Archers," on the story of William Tell. It 
was produced at the New York Theatre on April 
1 8, 1796, with music composed by Benjamin 
Carr. 37 

In the spring of this year Dunlap took the most 
fateful step of his life, a step which determined his 
whole future. In his own words : 

"About this time, Hodgkinson pressed upon the 
author of The Father of an Only Child, ... a 
purchase of his half in the concerns of the theatre, 
with the tempting bait of having the sole con- 
trol of the pieces to be brought before the public. 
The proposition was made on the 19th of March. 
The bait took. The enthusiastic dramatist seri- 
ously persuaded himself that it was his duty to 
take the direction of so powerful an engine as the 
stage ; his thoughts at the time lay open before me. 
Tf the effects of the stage are as great as its 
friends and enemies have concurred in represent- 
ing it, surely I should have the power to do much 

37 Repeated twice at New York. In October, 1797, it 
was given twice at Boston. The music of the opera is 
now lost except for two small portions, one of which, a 
song, is reproduced in Sonneck's "Early Opera in Amer- 
ica," opposite p. 99. 



2&iograjrt)p from ITfifi to 1B05 29 

good.' The power of the engine is certain; his 
power to direct it he ought to have doubted." 

He was informed that the theatre had cleared 
between $4000 and $5000 in the last six weeks. 
This and the control of the leading stage in the 
United States, "not forgetting the power to bring 
out his own plays," proved irresistible, and ar- 
rangements were made for him to assume his re- 
sponsibilities about the first of May. But Dun- 
lap's statement that he was urged to purchase 
Hodgkinson's half of the business is somewhat 
misleading, for it appears that he acquired only 
half of the latter's share, so that he and Hodgkin- 
son each owned a fourth interest in the theatre, 
while Hallam held the remainder. As to the price, 
we are only told that the purchaser was to set the 
value of the property with unlimited time for 
payment; but the year before, Hodgkinson had 
offered to sell out for $1 2,50a 38 



II 

The situation which confronted the new director 
can best be understood with the aid of a few facts 
concerning the previous history of the American 
theatre. There has been considerable difference 
of opinion as to the beginning of the histrionic art 
in this country, but Mr. O. G. Sonneck, who has 
the latest word on the subject, says that Tony 
Aston, an English actor, performed at Charleston 

38 "American Theatre," pp. 138, 148; see post, pp. 44 ff. 



30 f©illiam SDimlap 

in 1703, and at New York in 1703-4. 39 In 1714 a 
play was attempted at Boston, but it met the op- 
position of Chief Justice Sewall. Williamsburg, 
Virginia, witnessed an unidentified play as early 
as 1718, and a theatre is known to have existed 
there by 1722. 40 Whether this was a structure 
erected expressly for drama cannot be said. New 
York's first company seems to have been a pro- 
fessional body from London, which held forth be- 
tween 1732 and 1734, giving on three nights a 
week such plays as "The Recruiting Officer," "The 
Beaux' Stratagem," and "Cato." Their theatre was 
an upper room near the corner of Pearl Street and 
Maiden Lane; in it a platform stage and about 
four hundred raised seats had been constructed. 41 
In 1735-6 Charleston was the scene of activity of 
an anonymous company, which gave "The Or- 
phan," "George Barnwell," and other plays, at a 
charge of 40 shillings a seat. In 1736 a new 
theatre, apparently put up especially for dramatic 
purposes, was opened in Dock Street. 42 Phila- 
delphia's first theatrical experiment seems to have 
been made by a semi-professional company which 
gave "Cato" in August, 1749, and probably re- 
mained until suppressed by the magistrates as a 
public menace. The same company is thought to 

39 "Early Opera in America/' 1915, p. 7. 

40 C. P. Daly, "First Theatre in America," Publications 
of the Dunlap Society, second series, No. 1, 1896, pp. 16, 
21-3. 

41 T. A. Brown, "History of the New York Stage," 
New York, 1903, Vol. I, p. 1. 
42 Daly, pp. 49-53- 



25iograpt)p from 1 7 fifi to 1 SB5 3 l 

have gone to New York in 1750, and to have 
stayed over a year. 43 The Thespians took pos- 
session of a room in a wooden building on Nassau 
(then Kip) Street, belonging to Rip Van Dam. 
This second New York theatre was thus described 
by T. A. Brown : 

"It was a two-storied house, with high gables. 
The stage was raised five feet from the floor. The 
scenes, curtains, and wings were all carried by the 
managers in their 'property' trunks. A green curtain 
was suspended from the ceiling. A pair of paper 
screens were erected upon the right and left hand 
sides, for wings. Six wax lights were in front of 
the stage. The orchestra consisted of a German 
flute, horn, and drum players. Suspended from 
the ceiling was the chandelier, made of a barrel 
hoop, through which were driven half a dozen 
nails, into which were stuck so many candles. Two 
drop scenes, representing a castle and a wood, 
bits of landscape, river, and mountain, comprised 
the scenery." 44 

The room contained a pit and gallery, and later 
boxes, and had a capacity of about three hundred. 
The admission was 8 shillings to the boxes, 5 
shillings to the pit, and 3 shillings to the gallery. 45 
(In New York eight shillings was then the equiva- 
lent of one dollar.) 

43 G. O. Seilhamer, "History of the American Theatre," 
Vol. I, pp. 2-4; Brown, Vol. I, p. 2. 

44 "History of the New York Stage," Vol. I, p. 2. 

45 Daly, pp. 4-5. 



32 !©xfliam SDunlap 

Perhaps the most important event in the early 
history of the American theatre was the arrival 
of the Hallam Company in 1752. So significant 
was this occurrence that Dunlap began his 
chronicles of the stage at this point, ignoring all 
that had preceded it. William Hallam, manager 
of a minor London theatre, became bankrupt in 
1750, and resolved to try his fortunes in the New 
World. He collected a band of about a dozen 
actors of no distinction, placed them under the 
direction of his brother Lewis, himself an actor, 
and sent them across the Atlantic. Their repertory 
consisted of perhaps twenty-four dramas, mostly 
Shakespearian and Restoration, and eight or ten 
farces. The troupe landed in Virginia, probably 
choosing the cavalier South as more favorable to 
the profession than the puritan North. They pro- 
ceeded to Williamsburg, where they inaugurated 
their career with "The Merchant of Venice" on 
September 5, 1752. An old store-house, re- 
habilitated, did duty as a theatre, and in lieu of an 
orchestra a lone harpsichord dispensed music. 

The next fall Hallam's players transferred their 
activities to New York. A new theatre was 
erected in Nassau Street for their reception, the 
first building constructed in the city expressly for 
dramatic exhibitions. The season extended from 
September to March ; the playing nights were Mon- 
day, Wednesday and Friday; the performances 
began at 6 o'clock ; the price of admission was soon 
fixed at 6, 4, and 2 shillings. 46 

46 Seilhamer, Vol. I, p. 46. 



2&iograjrt)p from X rafi to IB05 33 

In 1754 Hallam attempted to invade Phila- 
delphia, but the Quakers petitioned the governor 
to prohibit "profane stage-plays." Permission was 
finally granted the company to open a theatre on 
the condition that they offer "nothing indecent and 
immoral," that they devote one night's receipts to 
the poor, and that the manager give security for 
the payment of all debts contracted. The last 
stipulation clearly indicates the suspicion in which 
actors were held in many localities; indeed their 
status was often little better than that of vagrants. 
Vigorous opposition continued throughout the 
whole season of ten weeks. Pamphlets were dis- 
tributed, and every effort was made to show the 
evils attendant upon the theatre, but the company 
prospered none the less. 

Lewis Hallam was succeeded upon his death by 
David Douglass, who erected a new play-house on 
Cruger's Wharf in New York. He did so without 
the permission of the authorities, and when he 
tried to open the doors in 1758 the privilege was 
denied him. He then advertised a "Histrionic 
Academy" in which he "proposed to deliver dis- 
sertations on subjects moral, instructive, and en- 
tertaining, and to endeavor to qualify such as 
would favour him with attendance to speak in 
public with propriety." 47 This ruse failed to blind 
the eyes of the magistrates, but eventually per- 
mission for a brief season was granted. 

Douglass's actors, like all the early companies, 
were literally a band of strollers. They carried 

47 "American Theatre," pp. 18-19. 



34 UMIiam 2DunIa$> 

their simple equipment with them and moved 
about the country as they saw fit. There were 
no theatrical magnates with whom they might 
make advance arrangements. Uninvited they 
entered whatever town they chose, picked out the 
most likely substitute for a play-house, set up 
their dingy canvas world, and dispensed the riches 
of Shakespeare and Otway and Congreve until it 
seemed expedient for them to move on. 

Being the chief purveyors of drama to the 
colonies, the Douglass troupe of barn-stormers em- 
braced in its itinerary the extremes of Newport 
and Williamsburg, and besides New York, Phila- 
delphia, and Annapolis, visited many smaller towns 
where the court-house or other building was com- 
pelled to serve as a theatre. In general the 
actors were regarded as folk outside the pale of 
normal moral restrictions, from whom only evil 
conduct was to be expected. In reality their de- 
portment seems to have been sufficiently correct, 
and it was their custom to give a benefit for the 
poor to allay ill-will. One annoyance from which 
the players suffered was the presence of intruders 
behind the scenes and even on the stage. Some- 
times the number on the stage was so large as to 
interrupt the performance. In return the actors 
imposed an inconvenience on the public by going 
from house to house, soliciting patronage for their 
benefit nights. Both practices disappeared before 
Dunlap's time. 

In 1761 Douglass erected a theatre in Beekman 
(then Chapel) Street, New York. Five years 



3Biogra#)p ftoml7fiB to XB05 3 5 

later, during the stamp-act troubles, the populace 
stormed the house and wrecked it. 48 Whether 
prompted by the monarchical sympathy of the 
players or by some other cause, this wanton de- 
struction of their property indicates that the legal 
status of the profession was very low. But, noth- 
ing daunted, the next year Douglass built a new 
house in John Street. Dunlap, who began his 
career in this structure, described it thus: 

"It was principally of wood; an unsightly ob- 
ject, painted red. ... It was about 60 feet back 
from the street, having a covered way of rough 
wooden material from the pavement to the doors. 
. . . Two rows of boxes, with a pit and gallery, 
could accommodate all the play-going people of 
that time, and yield to the sharers eight hundred 
dollars when full, at the usual prices. The stage 
was of good dimensions." 49 

The dressing-rooms and greenroom were in an 
adjacent shed. 50 I infer that the capacity of the 
house was about one thousand. It was opened in 
December of 1767 with the popular "Beaux' 
Stratagem." On this occasion John Henry, who 
had failed of success in London, made his first 
New York appearance. He was handsome and 
capable, and eventually attained an important sta- 
tion in the theatrical affairs of this country. The 
leading player in the American Company, as it 

48 Seilhamer, Vol. I, pp. 141-2. 

49 "American Theatre," p. 28. 

50 Seilhamer, Vol. I, p. 212. 



36 IMIiam SDunlap 

was now called, was Lewis Hallam the second, 
who at the age of twelve had come in the original 
expedition with his father and mother, and had 
been almost reared on the stage. 

When it became evident that a break with the 
mother country was unavoidable, Congress, de- 
siring to direct all resources toward the national 
welfare, recommended that gaming, cock-fighting, 
and play-acting be discouraged,— such company 
the theatre kept in colonial eyes. Accordingly 
Douglass shipped his troupe to the West Indies 
to await more peaceable times. 

During the Revolution, the English soldiers 
were our only actors. Among other horrors of 
war, puritan Boston was compelled to abide the 
presence of a makeshift play-house with Burgoyne 
at its head. Philadelphia maintained a body of 
soldier-actors with John Andre as scene-painter. 
The John Street Theatre in New York was kept 
open almost throughout the struggle by British 
amateurs, to the delight of the youthful Dunlap. 51 

When the American Company returned, it was 
opposed on moral and patriotic grounds. In 1785, 
however, under the new managers Hallam and 
Henry, an opening was finally effected in New 
York, but during the season attacks by pulpit and 
press were unremitting. Indeed the clergy so 
inflamed the people that there were threats of 
demolishing the theatre. But the opponents con- 
tented themselves with the milder protest of a 
memorial signed by seven hundred persons, asking 

51 Seilhamer, Vol. II, Chapters II-III. 



25iograpl)p from 1 7BB to 1 B05 3 7 

the legislature to abolish theatres. This was met 
by a counter memorial with fourteen hundred 
signatures. In the City of Brotherly Love, 
whither the company repaired in 1788, the atmo- 
sphere was so uncongenial that the performances 
were advertised "gratis," and the plays were dis- 
guised by moral captions: thus, "She Stoops to 
Conquer" became "Improper Education"; "Ham- 
let," "Filial Piety"; "Richard III," "The Fate of 
Tyranny." And even then the house seems to 
have been closed by the authorities. But the next 
year the drama won a significant victory in the 
repeal of the prohibitory law. 52 

A few years later a similar victory was won in 
Boston. There acting had been forbidden by law 
since 1750, when some audacious individuals tried 
to perform "The Orphan." In 1792 a still more 
audacious group defied the magistrates and erected 
a temporary play-house. It was innocently called 
the "New Exhibition Room," and programs con- 
sisting of songs, acrobatic feats, and dances were 
given. Emboldened by the apparent indifference 
of the officials, these daring spirits next attempted 
dramas, advertised as moral lectures. After 
several weeks of impunity, the county sheriff "un- 
expectedly made his first appearance on that 
stage," and arrested the offenders. But in the en- 
suing year the restrictive ordinance was revoked, 
a substantial building was constructed, and the 
Boston stage became a permanent institution. 53 

52 Seilhamer, Vol. II, pp. 190, 244-59. 

53 W. W. Clapp, "A Record of the Boston Stage," Bos- 
ton, 1853, PP- 1-18. 



3% WHlmn SDunlap 

From 1792 theatrical conditions in the leading 
cities improved rapidly. In that year Thomas 
Wignell, a prominent comedian, withdrew from 
New York and organized a company in Phila- 
delphia, which, recruited from England, sur- 
passed its northern rival. He entered into 
partnership with A. Reinagle and undertook 
the construction of a play-house much larger and 
finer than any other in America. Hallam and 
Henry also reinforced their company with several 
new actors from England, chief among whom 
were John Hodgkinson and his wife. 

Hodgkinson, who was destined to play so im- 
portant a part in Dunlap's affairs, had risen as 
high as the Bath Theatre before crossing the 
Atlantic. He was an actor of great energy and 
versatility, equally capable in comic, tragic, and 
singing roles. He became the favorite of the 
public, and the bane of the other first-line play- 
ers, who were compelled to relinquish their prin- 
cipal parts to the newcomer. Mrs. Hodgkinson 
was almost as valuable an addition as her husband. 
Personally attractive and possessing a good voice, 
she made opera her forte, though she was far 
above mediocrity in comedy and tragedy. Hodg- 
kinson soon proved a Tartar to the John Street 
partners. Relations were already strained be- 
tween them, and the new man's high-handed 
methods caused a complete rupture. Henry, who 
saw himself and his wife, with the treacherous 
Hallam's concurrence, being driven from their 



25iogra#)p ftom l?fiH to 1005 39 

position, sold his share of the stock to Hodgkinson 
in 1794 and left the stage. 

Hallam and Hodgkinson were now masters of 
the north, while Wignell and Reinagle controlled 
the situation farther south. The American Com- 
pany was stronger than it had ever been, and the 
Philadelphia actors were the best group the 
country had yet possessed. Both companies seem 
to have been prospering and enjoying much public 
good- will. The theatre had overcome the most 
violent faction of its enemies: Boston had been 
successfully invaded, Philadelphia had repealed 
its prohibition, and New York was to see no more 
organized opposition. At this propitious period 
Dunlap's connection with the business began. 54 

A few general statements concerning the the- 
atrical customs and methods which obtained at 
this time, especially at New York, and we shall 
take up the narrative of the new manager's ex- 
periences. The company was a permanent group 
much like a modern opera company. It was at- 
tached to some theatre, which it considered its 
home, and where it gave performances the greater 
part of the year. At other times it visited else- 
where as a whole or in sections. The manager (or 
managers in case of partnership), who was usu- 
ally an actor, was not the hired servant of a body 
of owners or promoters, but was the ultimate di- 
rector and dictator of affairs. He owned or rented 

54 I have mentioned only those companies and cities 
which were especially important in the development of 
our theatre. 



40 JMttam SDuniap 

the house and its equipment, chose and cast the 
plays, hired the actors, arranged the salaries, and 
in general was monarch of the mimic world. 

The great majority of the players came from 
England, where they had served in the minor 
theatres. None, of course, had left positions of 
distinction in the mother country to try their un- 
certain fate in the New World, but frequently they 
developed into competent performers. Many of 
them were young players who had come at the 
invitation of the managers, some were soldiers of 
fortune, and a few were veterans who had out- 
lived their reputations at home. Until 1791 it was 
the practice of the American Company to pay its 
actors with shares of the profits, but in that year 
the salary plan was substituted; the salaries now 
ranged between about $10 and $25 weekly. A 
time-honored method of eking out the income was 
the benefit. A portion of each season was set 
aside for this purpose ; each member of the troupe 
was assigned a night for which he arranged the 
program, and from which he received the profits. 
Once an actor had shown his ability to handle a 
part, it became in a manner his property, and it 
was no uncommon thing to see an elderly man 
playing the youthful role he had been given years 
before. Because of this permanence of casts there 
was much rivalry for the leading parts, and much 
ill-will resulted, especially between the older play- 
ers and the new recruits fresh from England, who 
looked with lordly contempt on these Thespians of 
the wilderness. The actresses were frequently the 



23iogra$>ljp from X X fifi to 1 Bfl5 4 1 

wives of the actors, and were content to be known 
by their husbands' names. The marital confusion 
which characterizes the profession to-day was then 
less commonly found. Some of the players were 
fond of making themselves conspicuous on the 
street by their dress. West appeared in leather 
brejeches and a scarlet coat with a high collar, 
Roobins wore gold lace on his collar and three 
gold hat-bands, while Hodgkinson still powdered, 
curled, and braided his hair, and adhered to 
breeches and stockings instead of pantaloons and 
boots. "This costume, with his hat on one side, 
and an air and manner then known by the appella- 
tion of theatrical, marked him among thousands." 55 

An important member of the staff was the scene- 
painter. Before this period scenery had been 
largely neglected, a few cheap canvases, blackened 
with age, being used for all occasions. But in the 
nineties of the eighteenth century this branch of 
the art underwent improvement. New scenes were 
painted for the more prominent plays, and a vivid 
description of special scenery came to be one of 
the modes of advertising. Another indispensable 
personage was the attendant, who at intervals dur- 
ing the performance appeared on the stage to 
move the furniture or to snuff the candles. 

The repertories consisted of plays ranging from 
Shakespeare to the latest contemporary. English 
dramas were in an overwhelming majority; the 
recent London successes were imported as soon as 
possible. American plays were accepted, but the 

55 "American Theatre," p. 102. 



42 iMiiani jBDuniap 

most popular of them could not vie with the 
English pieces. Following British custom, the 
program was composed of a comedy or tragedy, 
with a farce or comic opera as afterpiece. Per- 
haps a pantomime or song and dance would serve 
as interlude between the two, or an elaborate 
pantomime might take the place of the farce. Not 
infrequently the bill would close with an acrobatic 
feat, such as a rope-walking act or a leap through 
a barrel of fire. 

The audiences were distributed in an interest- 
ing manner. The boxes, to which the admission 
was $i, were much more numerous than now, 
and were the resort of the ladies and the gentle- 
men who accompanied them. It was the practice 
of the box-holders to send servants several hours 
in advance to protect the seats from invasion. 
Certain boxes were reserved for the prostitutes, 
who did not neglect this opportunity to advertise 
themselves,— an evil which Dunlap greatly de- 
plored. The pit was occupied almost entirely by 
unattached gentlemen, who paid 75 cents for the 
privilege of sitting on a bench. Above them hung 
the chandelier of candles, and woe betide the ap- 
parel of the man who sat directly under it ! The 
gallery was reserved for the rabble at 50 cents a 
head. They were the most vociferous part of the 
house, and did not scruple to express their dis- 
approval by either words or missiles. At times 
actors, orchestra, and audience alike suffered from 
their attentions. 

But with all its crudity, our early theatre 



2&iograp|)p from 1 7HB to 1 B05 43 

achieved honorable results. The permanent 
classics of English dramatic literature held a much 
larger place than they do to-day. Shakespeare, 
Otway, Farquhar, Rowe, and Lillo found an 
abode in the play-houses of America, and actors 
capable of interpreting them. The companies 
must have been prodigiously industrious; during 
a year's run they would sometimes give as many 
as seventy different plays and about the same 
number of farces. And at their best these per- 
formances were finished, dignified, and artistic. 



Ill 

While the negotiations were in progress by 
which Dunlap became a theatrical manager, the 
realization was forced on him that his two pro- 
spective associates were bitter enemies. Hodgkin- 
son had compelled Mrs. Hallam to withdraw from 
the stage temporarily, because of her persistent in- 
toxication, in which state she often insulted him 
and disgraced herself before the audience. Hallam 
protested that his wife had been misrepresented, 
and that his partner had stolen all the principal 
parts for himself and his favorites; while Hodg- 
kinson swore that he would refuse to play unless 
he could have the parts he desired. This strife, 
the result of professional jealousy, it became the 
new director's first duty to allay. He found the 
task so exasperating that he offered to sell out 
and retire. But in June a two-year agreement was 



44 JBflliam SDuntop 

drawn up and signed, which reduced the machinery 
to some sort of running order. This contract 
throws so much light on Dunlap's position in the 
new concern that it is worth quoting in full. 



ARTICLES of AGREEMENT 

Between 

Lewis Hallam, John Hodgkinson, 

and 

William Dunlap. 

We, the Subscribers, do hereby Covenant and 
Agree, to exert ourselves in the several Ways 
hereafter mentioned, for the mutual Benefit and 
Profit of each other, and of that Property known 
under the Denomination of Property of the Old 
American Company; of which the One Half be- 
longs to Lewis Hallam, One Fourth to John 
Hodgkinson, and One Fourth to William 
Dunlap. 

That William Dunlap shall, as Acting Manager 
of the Company, determine, weekly, the Busi- 
ness of the coming Week; that is, what Plays 
shall be performed; subject to no other Con- 
troul than the joint Disapprobation of the other 
Proprietors. That he shall get up what new 
Pieces he shall think best, and in the Manner 
he shall deem proper, subject only to the same 
Controul; and cast them in Conformity to his 
Judgment, and the Articles of the several Per- 
formers. 



2ftostajrt)p from ITfifi to xa05 45 

That Lewis Hallam shall exert himself as a Per- 
former in all those Characters which he has per- 
formed, on Stock Nights, since the Commence- 
ment of the Firm of Hallam and Hodgkinson, 
if called upon so to do by the Acting Manager, 
either by Notification that the Plays containing 
such Characters will be performed, or other- 
wise: That these Characters are considered as 
his Property ; but he shall not resign any one or 
more of them, without the Concurrence of the 
Acting Manager ; and then only into his Hands, 
to be at his sole Disposal. 

That John Hodgkinson, etc., as in preceding 
paragraph. 

That, in all Engagements made with any Per- 
formers, the Acting Manager, and one of the 
other Proprietors, shall have Power to bind the 
three ; and no Contract or Engagement shall be 
made with any Person whatever, without such 
Concurrence of the Acting Manager, and one of 
the other Proprietors. 

That no other Division of the Profits of the Co- 
partnership shall take Place, under any Appella- 
tion whatever, than such Division, or in such 
Proportion as now exists; and no Alteration 
whatever shall take Place, without the Concur- 
rence of all the Proprietors. 

That, to prevent Discord and Confusion behind 
the Scenes, no Person shall be admitted, except 
the Performers, under any Pretence whatever, 
without a written Permission from the Acting 



46 IBifitam 2Dunla$> 

Manager; Servants, &c., having Tickets for the 
Season. 

That, in all Regulations for the Welfare of the 
Theatre, made by the Acting Manager, with the 
Concurrence of the other Proprietors, or such 
one of them as shall be present, they shall con- 
sider themselves on an Equality with the other 
Performers, except as more bound to a scrupu- 
lous Observance of them by the superior In- 
fluence of their Example. 

That the following Plays, The Revenge, Dis- 
tressed Mother, Suspicious Husband, Hamlet, 
Much Ado about Nothing, and such other of 
the old Drama as have not been performed dur- 
ing the Firm of Hallam and Hodgkinson, shall 
be liable to the Cast of the Acting Manager; 
Mr. Hallam or Mr. Hodgkinson having no other 
Controul over such Cast than the Refusal to 
play in the Piece, if the Character allotted to 
either of them is such as he shall object to. 

That, in Addition to the Business of Acting 
Manager, William Dunlap shall act as Treas it 
and Bookkeeper to the Company. 

That John Hodgkinson shall assist the Acting 
Manager by his Advice and Personal Aid; and 
in Case of William Dunlap 's Sickness, or Ab- 
sence from other unavoidable Causes, or for 
Purposes agreed upon among the Proprietors, 
or a Majority of them, John Hodgkinson shall 
be considered as Acting Manager, and execute 
the Duties of the Office in the Place of William 



25iosra}% from 1 7 Hfi to 1 BII5 4 7 

Dunlap; receiving from said Dunlap (in Case 
such Absence shall be for one or more Weeks) 
that Salary which he receives as Acting 
Manager. 

That, in Case of any Default on the Part of either 
or any of the Subscribers, within the Term of 
two Years, from the first Day of May, 1796, 
they do severally bind themselves in the Penalty 
of Four Thousand Pounds, lawful Money of the 
State of New- York, to be forfeited by such 
Breach of this Agreement. 

That, in Case any of the Subscribers should deter- 
mine on selling the Whole, or any Part, of their 
Division of the above-mentioned Property, within 
the above-named Time, the Party so wishing 
to sell, shall give the Offer, or Refusal, to the 
other Party or Parties, at a Price to be agreed 
on by them, or to be determined by three in- 
different Persons, chosen by the respective 
Parties. 

Lewis Hallam. (l. s.) 
*dugh Gaine John Hodgkinson. (l. s.) 
'sohn Gamage William Dunlap. (l. s.) 56 

Early in July, upon the closing of the theatrical 

year in New York, Dunlap escorted the company 

to Hartford, where it shortly became apparent 

that the receipts could not meet the costs. After 

advancing $400 or $500 from his own pocket, he 

56 John Hodgkinson, "A Narrative of his Connection 
with the Old American Company, From the Fifth of Sep- 
tember, 1792, To the Thirty-First of March, 1797," New 
York, 1797, pp. 20 ff. 



48 UMKiam SDuniaj* 

withdrew to Perth Amboy to spend the summer 
with his family and Brown. 

Late in September, 1796, John Street opened 
for the fall season. The company, with which the 
new manager was connected, included a few actors 
worthy of mention besides the Hallams and Hodg- 
kinsons. Chief among these was Joseph Jefferson, 
who had come from England a year or two be- 
fore. 57 Though still under twenty-five, he was 
already an artist in comedy and soon attained the 
first rank among American comedians. Dunlap 
described him as a handsome youth with a per- 
fectly Grecian nose, blue eyes full of laughter, and 
a mobile face capable of exciting mirth by the 
power of feature alone. Another performer of 
note was Mrs. Melmoth. She had gone through 
a respectable career at Covent Garden and Drury 
Lane, but when her figure grew too matronly and 
her reputation too time-worn, she came to America 
in 1793, and engaged for New York, where she 
became a favorite in tragedy. Mr. and Mrs. John 
Johnson were also actors of considerable ex- 
perience in England, Johnson having played for 
five years at the Haymarket. They became valu- 
able acquisitions of the New York company early 
in 1796. Mrs. Johnson, who was tall, beautiful, 
and elegant of manner, played the fine ladies of 
comedy more perfectly than any one had yet 
done in this country. It was a highly specialized 
company ; each performer had his particular forte, 

57 Joseph Jefferson of Rip Van Winkle fame was his 
grandson. 



2&iogra$>f>p from 1 7 Hfi to 1 B05 49 

and the parts were distributed accordingly. Thus 
one actor made a specialty of comic old men, an- 
other of serious fathers, a third of romantic 
heroes; one ac^ims was excellent in old women, 
another in young girls, etc. It was, as a whole, a 
company of no little versatility and merit. 

On the last day of October a new drama from 
Dunlap's pen, "The Mysterious Monk," was per- 
formed with Hodgkinson in the leading part. Its 
reception was not enthusiastic. 58 Quiet now 
seems to have prevailed in the greenroom, but 
the theatre was not to be the abode of tranquillity. 
One night in November two sea captains became 
drunk (it was then permissible to bring liquor into 
the house), and began calling for "Yankee 
Doodle" during the overture. Not receiving the 
desired solace for their patriotic ears, they hurled 
missiles at the orchestra and defied the indignant 
audience. A riot ensued, which resulted in the 
ejection of the offenders; but returning later with 
a number of sailors, they assailed the doors of the 
play-house until the city watch took them into 
custody. This fracas resulted in the prohibition of 
intoxicants until the end of the first piece. 59 

Perhaps it was about this time that Dunlap came 
to grief through a practical joke. Dr. Pierre 
Michaux, a French refugee in New York, had 
published a tract on surgery. Dr. Wright Post, 
a surgeon of the city, induced his friend Dunlap 

58 It was repeated in November, 1796, and again in 
January, 1803. 

59 Seilhamer, Vol. Ill, p. 381. 



50 t©tfliam 2Dunlap 

to write a caricature of the work and the author. 
At John Street a ludicrous afterpiece was gotten 
up, called "Fractura Minimi Digiti," in which 
Michaux was excellently taken off. The next 
Sunday, as the dramatist was leaving the Brick 
Church, the irate Frenchman set upon him, and 
gave him such a drubbing as to suspend his church 
attendance for some weeks. 60 

On the 9th of January, 1797, Dunlap initiated a 
new phase of his work by presenting a partial 
translation from the French, "Tell Truth and 
Shame the Devil." This two-act sketch was re- 
peated once or twice, and two years later it had the 
honor of appearing, somewhat reduced, at Covent 
Garden. An English critic pronounced it a 
"trifling performance, which might have been con- 
fined to the other side of the Atlantic without any 
loss." 61 

The Hallam-Hodgkinson feud continuing to the 
distress of the new partner, he relinquished his 
salary and retreated for a time. During his 
temporary absence from the field of conflict, an 
extraordinary episode occurred. The Hallams, 
having resolved to reinstate Mrs. Hallam, had 
secretly scattered their supporters through the 
house, and when Hodgkinson came on he was 
stupefied by a chorus of hisses. Mrs. Hallam 
then entered, dressed in black and looking "beauty 

60 J. W. Francis, "Old New York," New York, 1866, pp. 

66-7. 

61 "European Magazine and London Review," Vol. 
XXXV, p. 330. 



25iograp()p from 1 7 fifi to 1 BH5 5 l 

in distress." Loud plaudits greeted her, while 
clubs were brandished at the speechless Hodgkin- 
son. At this point Hallam, also dressed in black, 
stalked in, and requested that his wife be given a 
hearing. Whereupon she read a statement of her 
grievances and retired. Both men now tried to 
address the audience, but Hodgkinson succeeded 
in gaining its ear. After silencing Hallam and 
quelling the rioters, he continued the play amid 
constant applause. But the next night he was 
hissed off the stage, and in his wrath he refused 
to have anything more to do with the theatre. 
Suit was begun against Hallam for disturbing 
the peace, and that clever actor, to gain sympathy, 
insisted on going to jail in spite of the sheriff's 
efforts to prevent him. He soon wearied of this 
and liberated himself, but his point had been won 
and Mrs. Hallam was free to return to the stage. 
Hodgkinson having thrown up the command, 
Dunlap was compelled to resume his position. 

Early in May he obtained a brief respite from 
his trials by going to Philadelphia as a deputy to 
the Abolition Convention. Smith and Mitchill 
accompanied him, and a happy reunion with Brown 
took place. As chairman of a committee, the 
dramatist drew up a memorial, which produced 
from Congress an act against the slave-trade. 
Sometime later a slave-ship was condemned 
through testimony of his procuring. Dunlap's 
attitude toward slavery was broad-minded and 
sane. While deprecating the evil, he realized that 
out-and-out abolition might do more harm than 



52 i©tfiiam SDurdap 

good by working injustice both to the slaveholder, 
who sometimes was innocently such, and to the 
slave, who might be more miserable free than 
bound. Colonization appealed to him as the most 
satisfactory solution. 62 

On June 7, 1797, perhaps as a sort of peace 
offering to Hodgkinson, Dunlap staged "The Man 
of Fortitude," a joint product of the two men. It 
was, however, a case of involuntary collaboration, 
since Hodgkinson had appropriated the other's 
manuscript and rewritten it to suit himself. 63 

On the 16th of June the new manager's first 
season closed. His previous life of peaceful 
leisure had given place to one of much activity, 
responsibility, and turbulence. He had suddenly 
been plunged into a world of discord and petty 
strife which tried his spirit sorely. The com- 
pensation seems already to have been inadequate 
to his investment of time and money, for during 
the summer we find him trying to borrow a few 
hundred dollars to reopen in the fall. 64 Dunlap's 
influence on the productions of this year has been 
described by Seilhamer, his constant and unreason- 
ing detractor, as "grotesque." 65 Such attacks are 
scarcely worthy of notice, yet it should be pointed 
out that far from suffering, our stage benefited 
from this year of his directing. The old pieces 
were much the same as those of the previous 

62 "American Theatre," p. 170. 

63 It was repeated in 1798, and given twice in 1806. It 
was acted at Albany in 1824-5. 

64 Dunlap's Diary, Vol. XIV, p. 49. 

65 Seilhamer, Vol. Ill, p. 387. 



25xogra#jp from irfifi to 1BA5 53 

season, which Seilhamer characterized as the most 
brilliant ever known at John Street; and among 
the new ones were five American plays, represent- 
ing four different writers, as against one the 
previous year. Such encouragement of native 
drama hardly deserves condemnation. 

Before the closing of the theatre, important 
changes had been decided on for the fall. A group 
of business men were constructing a new play- 
house in Park Row. Dunlap and Hodgkinson 
were invited to become joint lessees of the build- 
ing, and in May they agreed to occupy it for the 
four ensuing seasons. The two managers ar- 
ranged between themselves that Hodgkinson 
should receive $55 a week as actor and stage super- 
intendent, and Dunlap $24 as treasurer and joint 
director. They agreed with Hallam to purchase 
his theatrical property, to give him one fourth of 
the profits, and to retain him and his wife as actors. 

The first two accessible volumes of Dunlap's 
manuscript Diary extend from July 27, 1797, to 
June 1, 1798. If my account of this period is 
disproportionately full, it is because I have the 
material to give a more intimate picture of the 
man than heretofore. The last of July found him 
and his family spending the summer with his 
mother at Perth Amboy. In these pages occur 
numerous references to his children, John and 
Margaret. To their education he devoted much 
care, and was rewarded by a certain precocity in 
John, who read ''Alexander's Feast" to his father, 
perused Shakespeare's historical plays eagerly, and 



54 JMIiam SDunfap 

for pastime sailed round the world on a map, 
visiting the places Cook had introduced him to. 
But the boy sometimes found less intellectual 
amusements, as this pleasant glimpse shows: 

"Aug. 7. After breakfast I walked off for 
Woodbridge, the two Children by agreement go 
with me as far as the Barracks to carry my little 
bundle; I took them nearly to the parting roads, 
kiss'd them and sent them back hand in hand, after 
walking some way I looked back thro' my glass 
and saw that Margaret had submitted that John 
should drive her as his horse with a rush whip & 
they both were galloping into town." 66 

Dunlap's employments were gardening, nature 
study, and reading, often with his wife. He 
seems to have read everything available, includ- 
ing the encyclopedia, through which he waded 
alphabetically, passing from Platonism to potatoes 
without a qualm. A specimen day from the Diary 
will throw much light on his habits: 

"July 28. Before day we had a violent gust 
of wind rain & lightning. I was up before 5 & 
worked in the garden some hours. Read Hume 
with John & teach Margaret. Write to Hol- 
croft. I had an opportunity of observing that the 
young blue bird is considerably like the young 
Robin. I saw yesterday, in a boy's hands, a young 
flying squirrel, I took him & examined his 
peculiarty. Afternoon walk a little way with my 

66 Diary, Vol. XIV, pp. 24-5. 



2fto0rajrt)ji from 170fi to 1HI15 55 

gun: shot a rabbit. The male Bobolink has dis- 
appeared. Return to tea at Mrs Terrills. Read 
Condorcet. We have a fine rain." 67 

Even to this quiet retreat Dunlap's troubles pur- 
sued him. At the close of the last theatrical season 
Hodgkinson assumed his duties as part manager 
of the new concern by taking the company north 
for the summer. After a few nights of loss at 
Hartford, he moved on to Boston. The Hartford 
proprietors being dissatisfied, he engaged another 
company under the direction of one Solee, to finish 
out the season there. At Boston Hodgkinson lost 
money regularly. Thus Dunlap was called upon to 
support two companies that could not meet ex- 
penses. He was opposed to the summer touring 
plan; he felt that the better measure was to do 
little or nothing in the summer and to open early 
in the fall, but his partner's ideas were of a more 
expansive sort and won his reluctant acquiescence. 
On August 16 he wrote to Boston, strongly reaf- 
firming his disapproval and advising concentration 
on New York. He concluded with this kindly 
sentence: "I feel for you Hodgkinson — I began 
this letter last night but was too much distress'd 
to go on . . . read this more than once & take 
no offence at it, our interest is one." 68 

The very thing which Dunlap's early fall open- 
ing plan was intended to prevent took place. In 
August Wignell and Reinagle from Philadelphia 

67 Diary, Vol. XIV, p. 2. 
es Ibid., Vol. XIV, pp. 34-5- 



56 UMiiam SDuniag 

established themselves at New York for a few 
weeks. In opposition to the invaders, Hodgkinson 
sent Solee to hold forth at John Street,— another 
losing venture, for the town could not support two 
houses. On the 8th of September Dunlap returned 
with his family to the city, and immediately 
busied himself trying to borrow money. Some 
months before, he had purchased a small farm 
near Amboy; on this security he tried to raise 
$900 or $1000, but somehow money was not forth- 
coming. He wrote Hodgkinson: "I am running 
about town to borrow, subject to mortifications 
which almost weary me of life." Another trial 
was ill-health. Then in October that most dreaded 
of pestilences, yellow fever, struck New York; 
the business of the store fell off in consequence, 
the apprentice died of the fever in Dunlap's own 
house, and Judah, his mercantile partner, became 
ill. But in the midst of these troubles he was able 
to spend social evenings with the Woolseys, to con- 
verse with Mitchill on chemistry and agriculture, 
to induct John into the mysteries of the multiplica- 
tion-table, and to commence a novel. His buoy 
was confidence in the new theatre. He wrote 
optimistically to Hodgkinson: "I believe three 
years of your spirited direction, with strict atten- 
tion to your interest as a manager and less solici- 
tude for your reputation as an actor, will put you 
above the necessity of being either manager or 
actor." In this hope he permitted his partner to 
continue the losing business in Boston in order to 
keep the company together for the new house. 



2Siograpl)p from X 7BB to 1 BQ5 5 7 

One begins to suspect that Dunlap was not a 
cautious business man. Further proof is the fact 
that he went to Perth Amboy the first of Novem- 
ber, and agreed to purchase a small piece of land 
adjoining his farm for $350. 69 

The novel which Dunlap began writing at this 
time, with the title of "The Anti- Jacobin," never got 
beyond a few pages in his Diary, yet the fragment 
possesses distinct interest. It shows considerable 
ability at narrative and portraiture, but it is chiefly 
important for the light it throws on its author's 
philosophy. The hero's prospective father-in-law 
repudiates him almost at the altar because he has 
become a radical thinker,— a Jacobin. The leading 
figure is a narrow and bigoted clergyman who 
hates anything savoring of intellectual independ- 
ence. "Enquiry," he says, "is an enemy to faith, 
& without faith there is no salvation." This 
polemical fragment was doubtless inspired by the 
inspirer of so much radicalism about 1800— William 
Godwin. Brown was a disciple of the philosopher, 
and through him Dunlap probably became ac- 
quainted with the tenets of the school. That he 
read "The Inquirer" in the summer of 1797, we 
learn from his Diary, and he must have been 
familiar with "Political Justice" as well. His ac- 
ceptance of Godwinism showed itself elsewhere 
than in "The Anti- Jacobin." Writing to Holcroft 
concerning slavery, he propounded this Godwinian 
aphorism: "That which is good, is only so, be- 

69 For this paragraph see Diary, Vol. XIV, pp. 51 59-96, 
100; Vol. XV, p. 122. 



58 i©tfitam SDunlap 

cause it produces happiness." In two magazine 
articles written during the autumn, he expressed 
Godwinian opinions on justice and virtue. And 
finally, he seems at this time to have leaned toward 
religious skepticism, if we may judge from an 
entry in his Diary: "Mrs. Woolsey ye younger 
made some indirect attacks on my infidelity" ; and 
from his contempt for Timothy Dwight's sermons 
on infidel philosophy, which he considered an "in- 
temperate farrago of falsehood and abuse." 70 

To return to affairs theatrical: Hodgkinson 
having left Boston, Dunlap set out for that city 
on the 17th of November to square up finances. 
The journey was eventful. Snow and rain fell 
constantly, the Connecticut River was crossed amid 
ice, and at Shrewsbury the stage-coach lost a rear 
wheel, in which accident the chivalrous Dunlap 
"had the felicity of supporting miss polly pease, 
the landlord's daughter." At Boston he found no 
other course open but to sign more notes. In- 
cidentally he hobnobbed with the Federalists, asso- 
ciated with Josiah Quincy and Jedidiah Morse, 
read Voltaire, and worked on a play called "Andre" 
which he had begun some years before. He re- 
turned from this futile journey in the middle of 
December. 71 

The new theatre had been promised for October, 
but it was yet far from ready. The managers had 
no alternative but to open at John Street in order 

™ Diary, Vol. XIV, pp. 6, 71 \ Vol. XV, p. 133 ; see post, 
pp. 272-3. 
™ Ibid., Vol. XIV, pp. 105-141 ; Vol. XV, p. 1. 



25iosrapf)p from X 7BB to I BH5 5 9 

to make at least a part of the salaries of the com- 
pany, which had been augmented in anticipation 
of the larger house. Delay was not the only ir- 
ritation. The partners had failed to obtain the 
signatures of the building committee to their 
agreement; the proprietors, taking advantage of 
this oversight, reduced the term of the lease at 
the agreed rate from three and a half years to one, 
and demanded free tickets to every performance 
for all the stockholders. The partners indignantly 
resented these impositions, and in the final contract 
a compromise was made by which the rent was 
slightly reduced in exchange for 113 free tickets 
nightly. 72 But the length of the lease remained 
uncertain. 

At John Street, Dunlap and Hodgkinson were 
losing consistently. As a last resource, on January 
29, 1798, they moved into the new theatre, though 
it was still unfinished. The program consisted of 
an address written by E. H. Smith, a curtain- 
raiser called "All in a Bustle; or, The New 
House," by Milne, "As You Like It," and a farce, 
"The Purse ; or, American Tar." The great event 
was advertised at length in the newspapers several 

72 Diary, Vol. XV, pp. 16 ff. The rent was proportioned 
to the nightly receipts as follows : 

7^2 per cent, on a $500 to $600 house. 
I2j^ per cent, on a 600 to 700 house. 
15 per cent, on a 700 to 800 house. 
17/^2 per cent, on a 800 to 1200 house. 
20 per cent, on a 1200 up house. 
10 per cent, on benefit nights. 



60 JBiiliam 2Dunlap 

days in advance with such instructions to patrons 
as these : 

"Ladies and gentlemen are requested to be par- 
ticular in sending servants early to keep boxes." 

"The offensive practice to Ladies, and dangerous 
one to the house, of smoking segars, during the 
performance, it is hoped, every gentleman will con- 
sent to an absolute prohibition of." 

"Ladies and Gentlemen will please to direct their 
servants to set dozvn with their horses heads 
towards the New Brick Meeting, and take up with 
their heads towards Broad Way" 

"The doors will be opened at 5, and the curtain 
drawn up at a quarter past 6 o'clock." 73 

On the opening night the crowd was so large 
that many pushed in without tickets. The receipts 
were $1232. Everybody was delighted with the 
new house, which was much larger and better ar- 
ranged than the old one, and especially with the 
scenery, which was said to surpass anything ever 
seen in America. 74 Dunlap was wonderfully set 
up over the success. At last his hopes were about 
to be realized, his dream of a popular theatre with 
the productions under his control was about to 
come true. In his exuberance he sent $100 to 
Perth Amboy in part payment for the new land, 
which before he was on the point of relinquishing ; 
and subscribed $20 to a fund for the relief of an 

73 "Commercial Advertiser," January 26 and following 
issues. 

74 "American Theatre," p. 221, states that by this time 
over $127,000 had been spent on the building, and only 
about $42,000 paid in by subscribers. Dunlap considered 
it a monument of waste and mismanagement. 



2&iogra$>ljp ftom l?fifi to 1B05 6 1 

embarrassed actor. But the next playing night 
brought in only $513, the third $265, and Dunlap 
was again in the depths. Indeed by February 7 
business was so bad that he seriously considered 
closing the establishment. 75 

At the end of February, however, there was 
reason for a little more optimism because of the 
enthusiastic reception accorded to Cooper, a 
recently engaged actor. Thomas Abthorpe Cooper 
was an Englishman, twenty-two years old, who 
had been reared by Godwin. In 1796 he was play- 
ing in the provinces with distinction, when Wig- 
nell arrived and hired him for Philadelphia. He 
performed in New York in August, 1797, with the 
Philadelphia Company, and was preferred to all 
other tragedians ever seen in the city. When he 
broke with Wignell and Reinagle a few months 
later, he found a ready opening at New York. On 
the 28th of February Cooper made his bow as 
Hamlet before a house of $895. In a few days 
"King John" was given; it seems to have been an 
unusually artistic performance, for the warmest 
praise was bestowed not only on Cooper's acting, 
but also on the general conduct of the stage, as 
well as on the costumes and scenery. 76 

It was soon discovered that Cooper was not a 
harbinger of permanent good fortune. The re- 
ceipts began falling below expenses. One night 

75 Diary, Vol. XV, pp. 39, 45 ; "American Theatre," p. 
218. 

76 "Commercial Advertiser," March 5. That Dunlap, in 
producing plays, strove for settings that were both attrac- 
tive and historically accurate, we learn from his Diary, in 
which he spoke of his researches for this purpose. 



62 !©ifliam SDunlap 

the house contained $99. But when Dunlap's 
"Andre" was brought out on March 30 to an $800 
audience, a temporary relief was experienced. 
This play had received the author's most careful 
labor; he had revised and polished it for months, 
he had staged it with new costumes and scenery, 
and he expected some comfortable returns. But 
two accidents occurred the first night which helped 
consign the play to an early demise. In the first 
place, Cooper, who was developing careless habits 
of study, had imperfectly memorized his part. In 
a scene— the most pathetic of the tragedy— be- 
tween him and Hodgkinson, his memory failed, 
and the actor, "after repeating, 'Oh, Andre!— oh, 
Andre!' . . . approached the unfortunate Andre, 
who in vain waited for his cue, and falling in a 
burst of sorrow on his neck, cried, loud enough to 
he heard at the side scene, 'Oh, Andre !— damn the 
prompter!— Oh, Andre! What's next, Hodgkin- 
son,' and sunk in unutterable sorrow on the 
breast of his overwhelmed friend." In the second 
place, when the American champion of Andre tore 
the cockade from his hat in his wrath at the spy's 
sentence, there was a protest from the audience. 
Dunlap altered the objectionable part, but on the 
second night the play was given to a house of 
only $271, and the third and last night for the 
author's benefit to $329. 77 

77 "American Theatre," p. 223 ; Diary, Vol. XV, pp. 76, 
78, 82. The prison scene from the last act of "Andre" 
was included in the matinee of American plays given on 
January 22 and 23, 191 7, at the Republic Theatre by the 
New York Center of the Drama League of America. 



2&iograpl)p from IZBB to 1B05 63 

In the spring of 1798 the proprietors of the New 
Theatre saw fit to end the existing lease and to 
require a rent of $5000 for the ensuing year. 
Hodgkinson found this a convenient opportunity 
to withdraw from the concern in order to assume 
the managership at Boston, and Hallam, to whom 
an offer of whole or part ownership was made, 
preferred to continue as a salaried actor. 78 In 
consequence, on the 27th of April, William Dunlap 
signed articles by which he became sole director 
and manager of the New York theatre. 

The season closed on June 29, and Dunlap re- 
tired to Perth Amboy. He had reengaged nearly 
all his old company, and with the theatre decorated 
and improved, and a new stock of scenery, he 
planned to open early in September to catch the 
summer visitors. But his hopes were not to be 
realized. Before the vacation was over, the city 
was again stricken by yellow fever. This time it 
broke into the circle of Dunlap's dearest friends. 
Elihu Hubbard Smith, while attending the sick, 
was seized with the malady, and died on the 20th 
of September in the presence of Brown and John- 
son. Brown himself was ailing, and with Johnson 
he repaired to the healthier atmosphere of Amboy. 
Here the three friends spent several weeks together. 
Brown wrote to his brother: "This calamity has 
endeared the survivors of the sacred fellowship, 

78 The Hallams continued as actors in the New York 
company until after Dunlap's retirement in 1805. 



64 J©ifiiam SDunlap 

W. D., W. J., and myself to each other in a very 
high degree." 79 

While New York was still in mourning, the 
theatre was opened on December 3 with the 
"School for Scandal." For this -event the manager 
had decorated the house at his own expense, and 
had thus brought it to a passable state of com- 
pleteness. The New, or Park, Theatre stood on 
lots 21, 23, 25 Park Row, about two hundred feet 
north of Ann Street. It was a very plain, three- 
story stone building, with a frontage of eighty 
feet and a depth of one hundred and sixty-five. 
Half a dozen steps led up to the entrance. It was 
the original intention to add a porch with a colon- 
nade, but it never materialized. Within, you 
passed the box-office on your right and entered a 
wide lobby, which admitted you to the auditorium. 
The stage was large in comparison with others 
then known, and bowed well out into the orchestra. 
The pit was considered remarkably commodious. 
The boxes, which were named after noted dram- 
atists, were arranged around the pit in three semi- 
circles. The lower circle contained sixteen boxes, 
and the second twelve; in this circle, the center 
box, which bore the name of Shakespeare, was 
large enough to seat two or three hundred. In the 
third row the boxes extended only along the 
side of the semi-circle, the middle being taken 
up by a gallery. There were in addition four or 
five private proscenium boxes. Cushioned benches 
rather than separate chairs were used, except in 

™ Dunlap, "Life of Brown," Vol. II, p. 10. 



25i05rapl)p from 1 7BB to XBU5 65 

the gallery, where the cushions were no doubt 
omitted. The total capacity was probably in the 
neighborhood of sixteen hundred. A much 
praised feature was the absence of all supporting 
pillars, which gave every one a clear view of the 
stage. The richness of the decorations was said 
to surpass anything in America. The dome, which 
corresponded in area to the pit, was azure, with 
clouds and celestial forms, and carried in front a 
medallion of Washington, sustained by an eagle. 
.Over the stage and each range of boxes hung a 
canopy of green and gold. The curtain of blue 
mohair, fringed in gold, contained in the center a 
lyre and the motto: "To hold the Mirror up to 
Nature." At various points about the room there 
were engaged columns of the Corinthian order, 
and numerous plaster figures. Elaborate chande- 
liers, totaling seventy-six lights, illuminated the 
house with the glow of candles. 80 

The company consisted of about twenty actors, 
an orchestra of fourteen, and a dozen or more 
helpers, including a scene-painter and a prompter. 
The weekly expenses of the institution were $1161 
without counting any remuneration for the man- 
ager's services,— and the first week's receipts were 
$997. 

The second week saw Dunlap's most important 
innovation. On December 10 he staged his ver- 
sion of Kotzebue's "Stranger" with Cooper in the 

80 "Commercial Advertiser," January 31 and December 
4, 1798; T. A. Brown, Vol. I, pp. 11-12; "American The- 
atre," p. 344. 



66 IBiftiam SDuniap 

title-role. Happily for the director, this play took 
the town. It was given at least twelve times dur- 
ing the season and proved the support of the 
theatre. 81 Its success determined the adapter to 
exploit its author further, and for this purpose 
he set about improving his rather meagre German. 
In January, 1799, Dunlap presented an opera he 
had written, called "Sterne's Maria; or, The 
Vintage," with music by Pelisier, a member of 
the orchestra. Cooper and Jefferson were among 
the performers. The opera was elaborately gotten 
up, and met with enough encouragement to war- 
rant four or five repetitions. Early in February 
"The Natural Daughter," a comedy by the same 
author, was brought out. It was "complicated 
and ineffective, and was most wretchedly played 
in a cold winter's storm, to empty benches, and 
never repeated." 82 But the writer was now -well 
started on a play-writing orgy, and the product 
came thick and fast. On Washington's Birth- 
day he contributed "The Temple of Independence," 
a musical afterpiece. 83 His second adaptation 
from Kotzebue, "Lovers' Vows," appeared on the 
nth of March, with Cooper in the leading part. 
It was as well received as its predecessor, being 
given eight or ten times during the remainder of 
the season, and retaining a place in the New York 
repertories for at least forty years. Next came 
Kotzebue's "Count Benyowski" on April 1, — 

81 It was repeated frequently for many years. 

82 "American Theatre," p. 260. 

83 Repeated on July 4. 



25iogtapIjp from 17fifi to 1BH5 67 

highly lauded for its beautiful Russian scenery 
and costumes. But the play did not prove lastingly 
popular. 84 Two weeks later "The Italian Father" 
made its appearance on the boards. It was in 
reality the work of Dunlap, but was thought to 
be another translation from Kotzebue, and was 
praised accordingly. The author, fearing the 
prejudice against American literature, did not dis- 
pel the illusion. Perhaps the secret leaked out; 
at any rate, the drama had an unsensational 
career. 85 Early in May the manager attempted 
another German dramatist, Schiller, but New 
York did not find "Don Carlos" to its liking, and 
it was not repeated. "Indians in England," another 
Kotzebue-Dunlap play, was given a single per- 
formance on June 14. On the 4th of July the 
"apparently indefatigable manager," as he called 
himself, closed the season with "The School for 
Soldiers," which he had altered from the French. 86 
The year had been an intensely busy one for 
Dunlap. Aside from managing the finances, 
supervising the productions, and attending to the 
multitude of details involved in running a large 
theatre, he had written or adapted ten new pieces 
and presented them before the public. It had 



84 Given about seven times at New York the first two 
or three years, and revived for two performances in 
1814. Given at Boston in 1 799-1800. 

85 Given three times this season, performed at Boston 
in the fall, and revived at New York for a single night in 
1802. 

86 Repeated four or five times on national holidays dur- 
ing the next few years. 



68 f©iHiam SDuniaj* 

been an important year for the American stage 
because of the number and popularity of the Ger- 
man plays. Hitherto our theatre had been domi- 
nated by British drama, but a powerful rival was 
now in the field. In many ways it was the most 
comfortable season Dunlap had ever gone through. 
Peace prevailed in the greenroom; there was no 
headstrong partner to turn his plans upside down ; 
and financially, thanks to Kotzebue, he was able to 
make both ends meet, though he seems to have 
realized little or no profit. For the next year he 
secured the theatre at a rent of $4000. But he had 
made an arrangement which was to result in 
further annoyance and distress. Hodgkinson's 
Boston enterprise having proved unsatisfactory, 
he had offered to return to New York, and Dun- 
lap, whether from pity, hope of profit, or fatal 
fascination, agreed to accept both him and his wife 
at a joint salary of $100 a week. 

As usual, Dunlap summered in Perth Amboy, 
where he employed himself in translating further 
plays of the favorite German dramatist. Be- 
cause of another visitation of yellow fever, the 
theatre did not open in the autumn until Novem- 
ber 18. Three weeks later "False Shame," a 
new translation from Kotzebue, was presented. 
Though devoid of scenery, this production gained 
great popularity through the splendid acting of 
Hodgkinson and Miss Ellen Westray. It proved 
the support of the house this year, but was seldom 
seen thereafter. 

On the 14th of December, 1799, occurred the 



25iograpl)p from 1 7 Bfi to 1 S$5 69 

death of Washington. The news reaching New 
York on the 20th, the theatre was closed for ten 
days. It reopened on the 30th for a kind of 
memorial program. The auditorium was draped 
in black. As an overture the band played "Wash- 
ington's March"; then a monody, written by C. 
B. Brown, was spoken by Cooper, who unfortu- 
nately had to be prompted throughout. A new 
play, "The Robbery," translated from the French 
by Dunlap, and a comic opera as afterpiece, 
rather inappropriately ended the program. The 
play was poorly given, chiefly because of Cooper's 
lapses of memory, and was repeated but once. 
Meanwhile greenroom difficulties were develop- 
ing. Cooper, feeling himself unjustly treated by 
the manager and thrown into the shade by Hodg- 
kinson, broke his connection with the company 
at the end of the year. This was a severe blow 
to the Park, but the vogue of Hodgkinson in 
German drama was a partial offset. 

Dunlap continued to dig for treasure in the 
Teutonic mine. Late in January, 1800, he pro- 
duced "The Wild Goose Chace," altered into an 
opera from Kotzebue's farce. The play itself 
had merit, and Hodgkinson's acting made it a 
success. 87 In March the translator began pub- 
lishing his German plays in a series called "The 
German Theatre." The first of this series, which 
did not go beyond the third number, was "The 

87 Given at Philadelphia this season. The next winter 
reduced to two acts, and as an afterpiece occasionally 
seen for three or four years. 



70 iBxHiamSDunlap 

Wild Goose Chace." It was printed in pamphlet 
form with portraits of Kotzebue and Hodgkin- 
son; it included a brief autobiography of the 
author, and a few notes marking the variations 
from the original. 

The opera was followed within two weeks by 
"The Force of Calumny," which was a moderate 
success. On the 12th of March appeared "The 
Virgin of the Sun," one of the longest-lived of 
Kotzebue's plays on the American stage. It was 
given five or six times this season with consider- 
able spectacle, and periodically revived during the 
first half of the nineteenth century. As the 
second number of "The German Theatre" it was 
printed in 1800. 

"Pizarro," sequel to "The Virgin of the Sun," 
came close on the heels of its precursor. Its 
premiere occurred on March 26; it was repeated 
at least six times during the spring, and published 
as the third number of "The German Theatre." 
Of all Kotzebue's plays acted in New York, it was 
far and away the most permanently popular. Dur- 
ing the forty years that I have investigated, it was 
given approximately two hundred times, while its 
nearest competitor, "The Stranger," was given 
only half as often. 88 

The last adaptation from the German this season 
was "The Stranger's Birthday," a two-act comedy 

88 The British translations of a number of these plays 
seem to have been used in New York after a few years; 
so the figures do not necessarily include Dunlap's trans- 
lations alone. 



25iograpl)p ftom 1 ? fifi to 1 B05 7 1 

which appeared and disappeared on the manager's 
benefit night. The theatrical year closed on July 
4, 1800. Dunlap had been only less productive this 
season than the last, having translated at least 
seven plays, six of them by Kotzebue. The year 
must have been a fairly encouraging one finan- 
cially. To an outsider the theatre seemed harmo- 
nious and peaceful, "but all within was discord and 
discontent." 89 

Throughout this season there had been much 
activity on the part of the newspaper critics, a 
tribe which began asserting itself in 1796. 
Previous to that date newspaper comment had 
been almost entirely eulogistic, but from then on, 
the critics assumed the right of condemning what- 
ever they chose. In 1 799-1 800 they had little else 
than praise for the German dramas, but the actors 
were ruthlessly handled, and the staging was some- 
times ridiculed. The players retaliated, threatened 
personal violence, and tried to muzzle their an- 
tagonists, which only spurred them on to new 
attacks. 

The season of 1800-1 began somewhat earlier 
than usual on the 20th of October. Four days 
later, to the delight of theatre-goers, another 
comedy by Kotzebue was most admirably played 
with Hodgkinson and Jefferson in the leading 
parts. "Fraternal Discord" proved to be one of 
Dunlap's most enduring translations. It outlived 
the six or seven repetitions of its first year, and 
continued to reappear for almost half a century. 

89 "American Theatre," p. 276. 



72 3©iiltam SDunlaj* 

To vary the monotony of German adaptation, 
the dramatist produced an opera, "The Knight of 
Guadalquiver," with music by Hewit, the orchestra 
leader. After two poorly attended performances 
in December, it was withdrawn and forgotten. 

The manager's troubles were again multiplying. 
Receipts had for some weeks fallen below ex- 
penses, and Hodgkinson, unrestrained by the 
rivalry of Cooper, was demanding everything, from 
a wardrobe appropriation to an equal share in the 
directing. Dunlap feared to alienate him and 
granted all except the last demand, but hostility 
resulted none the less. Dunlap no doubt became 
irritable, and Hodgkinson magnified every cause 
for offense. Quarrels were inevitable; the actor 
threatened blows, and the manager was accused of 
carrying pistols. 

In the midst of such difficulties, Dunlap placed 
one of his most popular translations on the stage. 
On the nth of February, 1801, "Abaellino, the 
Great Bandit," adapted from the German of 
Zschokke, began a long career. It was given at 
least nine times this spring, and for a quarter of a 
century it was one of the New York stand-bys. 
Nor was it confined to New York. It was soon 
to be seen at Philadelphia, Boston, Albany, 
Charleston, and indeed at almost every theatre in 
the United States. 

By way of commemorating Washington's Birth- 
day, Dunlap's patriotism again took dramatic 
form. As an afterpiece to "The School for 
Soldiers" he brought out "The Soldier of '76," 



23iograj)l)p from IZBB to 1BH5 73 

which seems to have been shelved immediately. 
A drama from the French, "Abbe de l'fipee," was 
acted in March, and repeated five or six times to 
the general satisfaction. 

The receipts this year having fallen below those 
of the last two years, the manager resolved on a 
summer campaign. For this purpose he engaged 
Cooper and Mrs. Merry, both of Philadelphia. 
Mrs. Merry, the wife of Robert Merry the Delia 
Cruscan, had come to this country in 1796, and 
had gained the reputation of being the most ac- 
complished actress in America. The theatre was 
kept open during July, but partly because of Mrs. 
Merry's illness the financial situation was not im- 
proved. 

With the welcome addition of Cooper, the Park 
resumed activities on November 16, 1801, but at 
the start the business was a losing one. The Ger- 
man mine was beginning to run out, and striking 
novelties were not easily obtained. In December 
a farce, "Where Is He?" translated by Dunlap 
from the German, was put on; and in February, 
1802, appeared another afterpiece, "The Merry 
Gardener," a comic opera from the French. On 
July 5 came an original play, "The Retrospect ; or, 
The American Revolution." 90 During this season 
the manager seems to have grown careless in the 
conduct of the stage business, a defect on which 



90 "Where Is He?" was acted four times this year and 
twice in 1810. "The Merry Gardener" was given three 
times this season. "The Retrospect" seems not to have 
been repeated. 



74 JMliam SDunlaj* 

the critics frequently commented. The battles 
were spiritless and silent, the grouping was awk- 
ward, and at times the actors behind the scenes 
failed to appear until summoned by those on the 
stage. On the whole, the year was not particularly 
creditable either in the manner of performing the 
old plays or in the quality of the new ones. 

Dunlap's offerings in 1802-3 were of a more 
dignified character. The first was "Peter the 
Great; or, The Russian Mother," from the Ger- 
man; it was given twice in November with small 
success in spite of the acting of Cooper and Hodg- 
kinson. 91 "Liberal Opinions," an original sketch, 
did not survive its first appearance in January. 
"The Voice of Nature," translated from the 
French, was introduced in February and became 
a favorite stock-piece. This was shortly suc- 
ceeded by "The Good Neighbor," a brief interlude 
from IfBand ; and this by the last of the Kotzebue 
translations, "The Blind Boy," which was almost a 
failure. 92 The final piece of the season was "The 
Glory of Columbia— Her Yeomanry!" a patriotic 
medley elaborately staged on the 4th of July be- 
fore a $1287 audience. The battle scene was par- 
ticularly spectacular, judging from the newspaper 
advertisement : 

A VIEW OF YORKTOWN 

With the British lines, and the lines of the be- 
siegers. Nearer the audience are the advanced 

91 Revived for two performances in 1815. 

92 Each of the last three plays was given about four 

times this season. 



2&ograpf)p from ITfiH to 1B05 75 

battalions of the besieged. Cannonading com- 
mences from the Americans upon the town, which 
is returned. Shells thrown into the town. Explosion 
of a powder magazine. The French troops ad- 
vance towards the most distant of the advanced 
batteries; the battalion begins to cannonade, but 
is carried at the bayonets point. (This is done by 
artificial figures in perspective.) While this is yet 
doing, the nearest battalion begins to cannonade, 
and the American Infantry rushing to the charge, 
they attack and carry it with fixed bayonets. 
(This is done by boys completely equip' d and of 
a size to correspond in perspective with the ma- 
chinery and the scenery.) The British are seen 
asking quarter, which is given. 93 

For many years the play was employed on national 
holidays at New York and elsewhere, and always 
drew crowded houses. 

The continuance of defective stage business 
called forth a rebuke that has become literature. 
In the fall of 1802 Washington Irving began his 
"Letters of Jonathan Oldstyle, Gent.," criticizing 
the theatre with Addisonian humor and whimsical- 
ity. These letters throw considerable light on 
theatrical conditions. Among the actors, Hodg- 
kinson was the chief subject of ridicule. His 
rotundity and his rant, breast-slapping, and gen- 
eral showy manner were frequently burlesqued. 
The lifeless conduct and stiff grouping of the supers 
were berated, as well as the incongruous mixture 
of costumes to be seen in one play. It was as- 

93 "New York Evening Post," July 3, 1803. 



76 i©iHiam SDunlap 

serted that "while one actor is strutting about the 
stage in the cuirass and helmet of Alexander, an- 
other, dressed up in a gold-laced coat and bag- 
wig, with a chapeau de bras under his arm, is tak- 
ing snuff in a fashion of one or two centuries back, 
and perhaps a third figures in Suwarrow boots, 
in the true style of modern buckism." The or- 
chestra was reprimanded for constant repetition of 
the tunes it had used for years. The audience 
also came in for its share of attention. The oc- 
cupants of the boxes, ignoring the performance, 
talked continually, according to Jonathan, and 
contrived to display themselves as much as pos- 
sible. The gallery gods, who were watched over 
by a constable, compensated for the lack of 
music by their NoahVark tumult, and used their 
surplus gingerbread and apples as missiles. Ir- 
ving's attacks greatly angered the actors, but the 
manager seems to have taken them in good part, 
for he published portions of them in his stage 
history. 

Soon after assuming the reins of government 
Dunlap had discovered that the audiences were not 
sufficiently cultivated to dispense with diversions 
of a physical kind, and, much as he deplored the 
custom, he was compelled frequently to introduce 
acrobatics and other spectacles. For instance, in 
1798 an evening was concluded by a leap through 
the throat of a fiery dragon. In 1799 a pantomime 
on the career of Don Juan ended with that hero's 
precipitation into the inferno amid a tremendous 
shower of fire. Late in 1802 a marvelous person 



25iogcapl)p from 1 7 fiB to 1 BH5 7 7 

was advertised to stand on his head and revolve 
from sixty to a hundred times a minute, an act 
aptly styled "The Antipodean Whirligig." A few 
months later one Signor Manfredi charmed the 
audience by performing on the tight-rope as a 
prelude to "Romeo and Juliet." 

The theatre had been fairly prosperous in the 
early part of this season, but in January, 1803, 
Cooper left to accept an offer in England, and the 
profits commenced to decline. In February the 
house was closed for two weeks because every per- 
formance meant additional loss. 94 In order to 
wind up the year's business, the manager was 
under the necessity of mortgaging his farm. Pur- 
suing a retrenchment policy, he intimated to Hodg- 
kinson that some reduction of salary might be nec- 
essary. Thereupon the actor for the last time 
broke his connection with the New York theatre. 
In 1805 he fell a victim to yellow fever. 

Dunlap, who was capable of considerable vin- 
dictiveness toward his foes, has represented Hodg- 
kinson as the villain in the tragedy of his man- 
agerial downfall. While paying tribute to the 
player's histrionic ability, he never omitted an 
opportunity to dwell upon the annoyances and 
losses he suffered through this associate. Un- 
doubtedly Hodgkinson's ambition, petty jealousy, 
and financial unreliability were a great trial to the 
director, yet his hold on the public was not a 
little responsible for such box-office receipts as 
there were, and was instrumental in postponing 

94 "New York Evening Post," February 5, 1803. 



78 IMiiam SDunlap 

Dunlap's day of reckoning. John Hodgkinson was 
without question the most useful and capable actor 
on our early stage. Not only was he excellent in 
comic, tragic, and singing parts, but he was one 
of the most efficient of stage supervisors (a 
capacity in which he served Dunlap) because of 
his thorough knowledge of the theatre and his 
ability to direct by example. But certain grave 
defects incurred Dunlap's hostility, and the friction 
was unceasing. 

With reduced ranks the Park reopened its 
doors on November 14, 1803. To supplant Hodg- 
kinson, John E. Harwood of the Philadelphia 
company was engaged as stage director and actor. 
As a comedian he ranked so high that Dunlap 
compared him to John Bannister ; his Falstaff was 
the best yet seen in this country. The manager's 
contributions this year were four : a farce, "Bona- 
parte in England;" two comedies, "The Proverb; 
or, Conceit Can Cure, Conceit Can Kill," and 
"Lewis of Monte Blanco; or, The Transplanted 
Irishman" (written for Harwood, who was espe- 
cially good as a Hibernian) ; and a French transla- 
tion, "The Wife of Two Husbands." 95 

Considerable attention was paid this season to 
scenic display. Commenting on "Lewis of Monte 
Blanco," the "Evening Post" of March 13, 1804, 
said : "The explosion scene has a very grand effect 
and reflects credit on the Theatre." On another 

95 The farce was given six times this season, revived in 
1809 and again in 1833 ; the first comedy was given twice, 
the second seven times; the translation was acted five 
times in rapid succession and occasionally revived as late 
as 1821. 



25iogra$jp from ITfifi to 1BH5 79 

occasion a mill with a running stream and a burn- 
ing house lent interest to the evening's program. 96 
But Dunlap's efforts were unrequited. The re- 
ceipts seldom equaled the expenses, and in Feb- 
ruary the house was closed again for two weeks. 
The director, however, was not the only one to 
whom the Park proved a burden. The building 
was heavily mortgaged, and though the total in- 
vestment amounted to $193,000 and more, the 
proprietors offered it to the lessee for $85,000. He 
named $40,000 as his highest price. It was put up 
at auction and sold for $43,000. Money was bor- 
rowed to complete the structure, but completed it 
never was. 

On October 22, 1804, Dunlap's last, fatal season 
began. 97 The only bright spot was a visit from 
Cooper, who acted fourteen nights in November to 
paying houses. This flicker of prosperity pre- 
cipitated a flood of bills, and the manager saw the 
end approaching. On January 1, 1805, he wrote: 
"Oppressed with disease and debt, I commence 
another year of my life with sentiments of gloom 
and self-disapprobation." 98 The theatre was fi- 
nally closed on the 22d of February, and the man 
who for nine years had labored so unceasingly to 
maintain the institution declared himself insolvent. 
He forfeited his property of every kind. For- 

96 "New York Evening Post," January 26, 1804. 

97 The sole product of Dunlap's pen this season was 
"Nina," an opera from the French, given once in Decem- 
ber and twice in February, with the original Parisian 
music. 

98 Quoted from the Diary in the "American Theatre," 
p. 326. 



80 UMIiam SDunlap 

tunately his mother's home in Perth Amboy was 
immune, and thither he repaired with his family. 

A survey of Dunlap's theatrical career reveals 
the fact that bankruptcy was impending almost 
from the beginning. Though he entered on the 
undertaking at a favorable point in our dramatic 
history, yet the odds soon arrayed against him were 
more than he could surmount. Yellow fever was 
one of his most persistent foes. Another was his 
own poor health ; hardly a year passed in which he 
did not suffer an illness. He was not happy in 
his business associates; the owners of the house 
as well as his partners proved grasping, unreliable, 
and extravagant in financial matters. Moreover, 
the theatrical business in America was a pre- 
carious one. Few managers were able to make it 
pay well permanently, and others besides Dunlap 
found it ruinous. His worst obstacles, however, 
lay within himself. Inside knowledge of the 
theatre he had none when he became one of its 
directors. In his relations with others he lacked 
self-assertiveness. His good nature and love of 
peace made him an easy prey to imposition. But 
his chief deficiency was absence of business fore- 
sight. He was willing to assume large obligations 
without any prospect of ever being able to meet 
them. In his optimism he trusted too much to the 
future, yet for him the future had an uncomfort- 
able habit of proving less encouraging than the 
present. 

Dunlap's methods of conducting the theatre did 
not materially differ from those of his predeces- 
sors, but he instituted three changes which were 



2ftograpl)p from ITfiB to 1BH5 8 1 

of importance in the development of our dramatic 
art. I. Having had experience as a painter, he 
emphasized scenery more than had been done be- 
fore. The scenic effects at the Park Theatre at 
their best must have been entirely adequate. 2. 
During the period of his control, American plays 
gained a more prominent place on the New York 
stage than they had previously held. This was 
owing in a large measure to the number of his 
own plays which he brought out, but at least a 
dozen other playwrights were represented. 3. His 
most distinct and significant contribution was a 
long series of French and German plays, so pre- 
sented as to develop popular interest in the 
dramatic literature of Europe. 

The managerial career of William Dunlap pro- 
vides an illuminating commentary on the state of 
culture in New York about the beginning of the 
last century. Here was a man with enough faith 
in the moral and intellectual benefits of a properly 
conducted stage to expend a large sum of money 
and enormous labor on the project, not primarily 
in the hope of financial returns, but rather for the 
improvement of his fellow-citizens. But culture 
was distinctly a matter of the individual and not 
of the masses. The theatre-going public, with 
little regard for the classics of English drama 
and still less for the productions of native play- 
wrights, required novelties and cheap amusements. 
And when the supply fell below the demand, they 
permitted the exponent of a cultural theatre to be- 
come a bankrupt. 



CHAPTER II 
Biography from 1805 to 1839 



WILLIAM DUNLAP retired from the the- 
atre with the realization that he had done 
his best. He forfeited neither his self-respect 
nor the esteem of his friends. That he retained 
the good-will of his company is attested by the 
performance given for his benefit on the 21st of 
June, 1805. 

But Dunlap was not merely a bankrupt. He was 
also a debtor to the United States Government on 
the bond of a New Jersey marshal who had proved 
a defaulter. It was imperative, therefore, that he 
hit upon a source of revenue. Apparently his first 
thought was to adopt the profession of letters. 1 
But while literary plans were maturing, bread 
must be earned. The most immediate expedient 
for him was to resume his brush and palette, which 
had been but rarely employed during the last 
dozen years. Miniature painting on ivory had 
become a profitable branch of the profession. 
Edward Malbone, the recognized leader of this 
department, was working in Boston at the height 
of his success, and other able men were operating 

1 "Life of Brown," Vol. II, p. 112. In answering the 
announcement of his friend's bankruptcy, Brown spoke 
discouragingly of Dunlap's plan for a literary career. 
82 



25iograj>l)p from 1B05 to 1B33 S3 

elsewhere. Because of the popularity of this 
branch, Dunlap resolved to attempt painting in 
miniature, though ignorant of some of the es- 
sentials of the process. 

He very soon found Perth Amboy an unproduc- 
tive field; so with his paints and a few ivories he 
started forth as an itinerant artist, as many an- 
other American painter had done before him. 
Albany was the city to which he first journeyed. 
Here he was cordially welcomed by his old friend, 
James Kent, now a dignified judge. But Albany 
did not take kindly to miniature painting, and the 
artist moved on to Boston, where he arrived with 
$6 in his pocket. Sitters were readily obtained 
at $15 a picture, and soon Dunlap was able to send 
money home for the support of his family. His 
relations with his fellow artists were very pleasant. 
The acquaintance with Gilbert Stuart, begun years 
before in London, was renewed; and Malbone, 
seeing his deficiency in miniature work, instructed 
him in the method of preparing ivories for the 
reception of paint, and thus enabled him to im- 
prove his pictures. 

After spending September and October in 
Boston, he set his face toward Washington, paus- 
ing to visit his family and to practise his vocation 
for a few days at Philadelphia and Baltimore. In 
Washington he associated with Samuel Mitchill 
and Joel Barlow, met President Jefferson and 
Vice-President Clinton, and made a miniature of 
Jefferson from a portrait lent by Mrs. Madison. 
He accomplished the main purpose of his journey, 



84 i©flliam SDuniap 

which was to learn what measures to take in the 
case of the defaulting marshal. What those meas- 
ures were we do not know, but Dunlap has said 
that Gallatin put him at rest concerning the debt. 2 

In the spring of 1806 the artist was back in 
Perth Amboy. One day while working in his 
mother's garden — the garden he had planted with 
fruit trees in his more opulent days — he was sur- 
prised by the sudden appearance of T. A. Cooper. 
The actor, having recently become lessee of the 
Park Theatre, made Dunlap on the spot an offer 
of the general superintendency of his theatrical 
concerns at a liberal salary. The ex-manager 
could not refuse this opportunity of a steady and 
substantial income, and once more he became a 
figure in the New York play-house. This offer 
must have been particularly welcome, since it 
proved that one of the most influential of his 
former associates still had full confidence in him. 
Concerning his experiences during this second 
connection with the stage he has left very little 
record, but we learn that among his duties were 
the care of the finances and the management of 
the institution in Cooper's absence. 3 

One of Dunlap's first undertakings after assum- 
ing his new position was the publication of his 
selected dramas. Pursuant to his plan for literary 

2 For the foregoing see "Arts of Design," Vol. I, pp. 
268-71. Unless otherwise stated, my authorities through 
this chapter are the "Arts of Design" and the "American 
Theatre." 

3 "New York Mirror," Vol. X, p. 266 ; "Arts of Design," 
Vol. I, p. 272.. 



25iogta|rf)p from 1B05 to 1B39 85 

activity, he issued a proposal for publishing ten 
volumes of his plays by subscription at $i a 
volume. The plays with a stage career were 
promised, as well as a few that had been neither 
acted nor printed, and many were to be nearly re- 
written. 4 

The first volume of the "Dramatic Works of 
William Dunlap" was printed by T. and G. Palmer 
of Philadelphia in September, 1806. It contained, 
as frontispiece, a portrait of Mrs. Wignell (for- 

4 The contents were to be as follows : 

Vol. I. "The Father of an Only Child," "Darby's Re- 
turn," "Lord Leicester; or, The Fatal Deception," "Fon- 
tainville Abbey." 

Vol. II. "The Feudal Baron," "William Tell; or, The 
Mountaineers of Switzerland," "Tell Truth and Shame 
the Devil," "Andre." 

Vol. III. "The Knight's Adventure ; or, The Man of 
Fortitude," "The Stranger," "Lovers' Vows," "Sterne's 
Maria." 

Vol. IV. "Count Benyowski," "The Italian Father," 
"False Shame," "The Force of Calumny." 

Vol. V. "The Virgin of the Sun," "Pizarro in Peru," 
"The Stranger's Birthday," "La Perouse," "The Wild 
Goose Chace." 

Vol. VI. "School for Soldiers," "The Robbery," "Fra- 
ternal Discord," "The Knight of Guadalquiver." 

Vol. VII. "Abaellino," "Abbe de l'Epee," "The Merry 
Gardener," "Where Is He?" 

Vol. VIII. "Peter the Great," "The Voice of Nature," 
"The Blind Boy," "The Good Neighbor." 

Vol. IX. "The Soldier of '76," "The Glory of Columbia 
—Her Yeomanry!" "Bonaparte in England," "Indians in 
England," "The Proverb." 

Vol. X. "The Wife of Two Husbands," "Nina," "Lewis 
of Monte Blanco," "One and Twenty." (The last title is 
apparently a misnomer for "Forty and Twenty.") 

See "New York Evening Post," July 2, 1805, for the 
above. 



86 IBtfliam SDunlap 

merly Mrs. Merry) by Dunlap, and a preface to 
the series in which the author said : 

"The pieces now offered to be assayed in the 
closet have already passed through the mint of 
the theatre, and received the stamp of public ap- 
probation. This last trial will ascertain their value, 
by determining the quantity of their alloy. . . . 

"Impressed with the fullest conviction that the 
stage is a vehicle by which moral instruction may 
be, with much effect, conveyed to the inhabitants 
of great cities, it has been my study, while writing 
plays, to make Pleasure subservient to the cause 
of Virtue. With these views, I trust I have not 
been so far unsuccessful that any parent need hesi- 
tate to put my volumes in the hands of his child, 
or the most scrupulous reader fear to meet pas- 
sages that would wound Decency, or suffuse the 
cheek of Modesty with a blush/' 

In respect to the translations, he had some strong 
words for the English playwrights who con- 
demned German drama while imitating it. 

The plays, especially "The Father," were more 
or less revised, and each was preceded by a brief 
preface. These four pieces are also to be found 
separately, each with the date of 1807, and with 
the imprint of David Longworth of New York, 
but with the pagination of the 1806 volume. The 
explanation seems to be that many copies of the 
book which were not sold, were broken up the 
year after it appeared and put out separately. In 



SSiograpfjp from 1 BU5 to 1 B33 Sy 

1808 David Longworth, who was publishing the 
"English and American Stage," issued other 
copies of Dunlap's book as Volume XXII of his 
series, with an additional title-page. 

The second volume, which did not come out 
till 1816, contained "The Voice of Nature," 
"Fraternal Discord," "The Italian Father," and 
"The Good Neighbor" instead of the dramas an- 
nounced in the prospectus. It bore the imprint of 
Longworth, and was formed by binding together 
these four plays as already published individually. 
Volume III, which made its appearance the same 
year, was constructed similarly, and contained 
"The Wife of Two Husbands," "Abaellino," 
"Lovers' Vows," and "Peter the Great." If 
further volumes were issued I have found no trace 
of them. The conclusion one draws from this 
rather complicated publishing game is that Dun- 
lap's plays did not sell very briskly, so that it was 
necessary to present them in various forms in 
order to exhaust the editions. 

The New York theatre seems to have been in a 
fairly prosperous way at this time, for in 1807 the 
interior of the building was completely remodeled 
and its capacity increased by the addition of a 
fourth row of boxes, which brought the seating 
accommodations up to about twenty-two hundred. 5 

In the autumn of 1808 the Park was opened 
under the management of Cooper and a new 
partner, Stephen Price, who was destined to be- 

5 "American Theatre," pp. 343-4 ; Dunlap, "Memoirs of 
Cooke," New York edition, Vol. II, p. 180. 



88 JBilliatn Dunlap 

come, in the course of years, the leading theatrical 
magnate of America. On him and Dunlap de- 
volved much of the responsibility of directing the 
establishment, since it was now Cooper's practice 
to perform two nights each week in Philadelphia. 

Boy actors were at this period the popular 
novelty. London had had its Master Betty, to- 
gether with a flock of imitators, and in 1809 New 
York had its -Master Payne. John Howard Payne 
was a youthful prodigy who, at the age of sixteen, 
made his bow on the New York stage as Young 
Norval in "Douglas," and followed with several 
tragic parts from Shakespeare and Kotzebue. His 
acting was rewarded with unusual applause, and 
according to Dunlap was extremely pleasing and 
full of talent. 

In the spring of 1810 Cooper went abroad, to 
be gone for nearly a year. Under the direction of 
Price and his assistant the theatre resumed opera- 
tions in the fall, but the patronage was very scanty 
until the arrival of George Frederick Cooke in 
November brought the Park a period of the 
greatest prosperity 7 it had ever known. Cooke was 
an English actor who by 1800 had attained to lead- 
ing parts at Covent Garden. He soon outdistanced 
all rivals save John Philip Kemble, but his per- 
sistent dissipation and his moral and professional 
irregularities earned him a reputation not wholly 
enviable ; and when Cooper offered him a position 
in America at twenty-five guineas a week, he ac- 
cepted without reluctance. 

Reaching New York on November 16, 1810, 



2Siograj>f)p from 1B05 to 1B39 89 

Cooke put up at the Tontine Coffee-House, where 
Dunlap called on him the day of his arrival, with 
no small surprise at the vigor and health and 
gracious address of a man who was reputed to be 
a sot. On the 21st of the month the great actor 
made his debut in "Richard III" before a packed 
house. New York had never witnessed a tragedian 
who could approach him in power and majesty, 
and the town was captivated. On the third night 
he was somewhat the worse for conviviality, his 
voice failed him, and the play ended in pantomime ; 
but the audience supposed he was suffering from 
a cold. At his benefit performance a few weeks 
later he had even less command of himself. The 
drama was "Cato," but he spouted Shakespeare 
and incoherencies of his own in place of Addison. 
The next night's receipts fell from $1878 to $467. 
But the average for this run of seventeen nights 
was $1269, the like of which New York had never 
seen. After a short engagement at Boston, Cooke 
returned to the Park ; but curiosity was now satis- 
fied, the public was disgusted with his conduct in 
"Cato," and the receipts dropped to an average 
of about $500 a performance. 

It was arranged that Cooke should go to Phila- 
delphia, and Price bestowed upon Dunlap the un- 
welcome honor of accompanying him in the 
capacity of guardian, an office which he accepted 
in the characteristic hope that he might have a 
good influence. On March 18, 181 1, the pair 
started south. They stopped for the night with 
Dunlap's family in Perth Amboy, where Cooke 



90 IMIiam SDunlap 

displayed all the polish and charm of which he 
was master, and passed one of the most innocent 
and restful nights of his life. Philadelphia was 
the scene of another histrionic triumph. So great 
was the demand for seats that some ardent souls 
remained on the steps of the theatre from Sunday 
morning till Monday morning in order to be sure 
of obtaining tickets. The average receipts for this 
run of twenty nights were over $1100. Cooke 
drank plentifully during the Philadelphia engage- 
ment, but seldom to the detriment of his acting, 
thanks to the vigilance of his guardian, who some- 
times drank more wine than was agreeable to his 
abstemious convictions in order to deprive George 
Frederick of it. The lion, on the whole, seems to 
have been fairly obedient to his keeper. On May 
i Dunlap departed for home, leaving affairs in 
the hands of Cooper, who had just returned from 
abroad. 6 

The sojourn in Philadelphia was not without 
an element of sadness because of the absence of 
Brown, who had died in 1810. In the Diary Dun- 
lap wrote: 

"I called yesterday for the second time on the 
widow of my friend, Charles Brockden Brown, 
and found her at home, and in company with his 
mother, likewise a widow since my last visit to 
this place. I saw the twin boys who used to be 
my playthings. I took them on my knees. I 

6 For preceding paragraphs see "Memoirs of Cooke." 



2ftograj>f)p from 1 BH5 to 1 033 9 l 

kissed them, and remembered former days — poor 
things!" 7 

His position having become disagreeable 
through no fault of Cooper's, Dunlap resigned 
his assistant managership toward the close of 
181 1, and withdrew permanently from the the- 
atrical business. 8 This period of nearly six years 
was a very unproductive one. Perhaps all his 
time was occupied with his duties; at any rate, he 
did nothing more than revive a few of his old 
plays and write a song, "The Freedom of the 
Seas," which was sung at the Park on July 4, 
1810. The newspaper comment was, "Sung with 
unbounded applause." The song, which was in- 
spired by English impressment of our seamen, 
comprises six rather spirited stanzas, each ending 
with this refrain: 

"We'll be free of the sea in despite of every foe, 
Though tyrants frown and cannon roar and the 
angry tempests blow." 

Dunlap was once more without an income, and 
once more he turned to miniature painting. He 
confined himself at first to New York, whither he 
removed his family from Perth Amboy, where they 
had resided since the bankruptcy. 

On June 18, 1812, war was declared on England, 
and the patriotic Dunlap immediately wrote a song, 

7 From sketch of Brown in "National Portrait Gallery 
of Distinguished Americans." Conducted by Herring and 
Longacre. 1834-6. Vol. III. 

8 "Arts of Design," Vol. I, p. 272 ; "Memoirs of Cooke," 
Vol. II, p. 354. 



92 BMHiam SDunlap 

"Yankee Chronology," which was sung on the 4th 
of July. It was soon augmented into an inter- 
lude, "Yankee Chronology; or, Huzza for the 
Constitution !" and given a dozen times during the 
conflict to enthusiastic audiences. In December 
he contributed another war song, "Yankee Tars," 
a composition of ten quatrains boasting of the 
vast superiority of our naval fighters. During 
the month it was occasionally sung as a solo at the 
theatre. 

The portrait business falling off in consequence 
of the war, the painter tried to increase his in- 
come by further literary ventures. Cooke, half in 
sport, had requested him to write his biography, 
and in the same spirit Dunlap had agreed to do so. 
After the actor's death in September, 1812, the 
task was pressed upon him by friends, so that he 
decided to undertake it. 9 With the aid of John 
Dunlap, his son, the work progressed rapidly, and 
was published in two volumes by Longworth early 
in 1813, with a portrait of the player from Dunlap's 
miniature. A London edition was also in con- 
templation. On December 30 Washington Irving 
had written to his brother, Peter, in Liverpool 
that Dunlap had almost completed a life of Cooke 
and desired to send him a manuscript to be dis- 
posed of in England. The letter ended, "as he is 
an old friend and a very worthy man, I make no 
doubt you will do everything in your power to 
benefit him." 10 The prospects were good for some 

9 Preface to "Memoirs of Cooke." 

10 P. M. Irving, "Life and Letters of Washington Ir- 
ving," Philadelphia, 1872, Vol. I, p. 293. 



2£>iograj#p from 1BH5 to 1B33 93 

remuneration from the London edition, but a 
curious complication destroyed this hope. The 
author's account of the transaction is this : 

1 'While I was in Boston [see below] I received 
letters from P. Irving, Esq., informing me that 
he had agreed with Miller of London to publish 
my life of Cooke and divide the profit; but be- 
fore I left it, I learned that John Howard Payne, 
having found a copy in a ship from New York, 
with a view to serve me, sold it to Colbourne [sic], 
who got out an edition before, (or on the same 
day) with Miller's, and the two publishers agreed 
to make the best for themselves, and sink me." 11 

The impression, which this conveys, that the book 
was actually published by the two houses is er- 
roneous, I think. I find no trace of an edition by 
Miller. Probably Colburn anticipated him suffi- 
ciently to quash his edition altogether. In 1815 
Colburn reprinted the work, indicating that it met 
a fair sale in England, though the price was one 
guinea. 

Another literary project of 1813 was the found- 
ing of a magazine. In April the first number of 
the "Monthly Recorder" made its appearance. 
Like various other enterprises of the editor's, the 
magazine soon began running him into debt; so 
he packed up his painting outfit and started north 
with the twofold purpose of making miniatures 
and securing subscriptions. He stopped at Hart- 
ford, Providence, and Boston, and obtained some 
sitters, but the "Recorder" met no encouragement 

11 "Arts of Design," Vol. I, p. 273. 



94 iMIiam Etmlap 

and died for want of sustenance in the fifth month 
of its existence. The five numbers were later col- 
lected in one volume as "A Record, Literary and 
Political, of Five Months in the Year 1813. By- 
William Dunlap and Others." 

On his return from Boston, the artist, at Stuart's 
suggestion, turned his attention to oil portraits 
and practically abandoned miniatures. Since 1805, 
when he entered this branch of the profession 
ignorant of some of its essentials, he had made 
distinct progress. A collection of sixteen of his 
miniatures was sold at Philadelphia in 1905. The 
catalogue of the sale, compiled by S. V. Henkels, 
stated that they were "executed in the highest 
style of the art," an opinion which the accompany- 
ing reproductions confirmed. Professor Theodore 
S. Woolsey of Yale, who has given special atten- 
tion to Dunlap as a painter, says : "As a miniaturist 
he excelled, showing charm of color, accurate 
drawing, and considerable power of characteriza- 
tion." 12 

Once more Dunlap was interrupted in the pur- 
suit of his vocation. In 18 14 he was appointed as- 
sistant paymaster-general of the State militia. This 
position involved much traveling about from New 
York City to Buffalo, and much mingling with 
many races — Indian, Dutch, English, and Yankee. 
His portfolio always accompanied him, and it was 
his custom to arise early and walk several miles 
from head-quarters to make water-color sketches 
of places of beauty or interest. From Buffalo he 

12 "Yale Review," new series, Vol. Ill, p. 779. 



2&iograpl>p from 1BH5 to 1B39 95 

walked to Niagara, where he spent four days 
sketching the falls. 13 

During his incumbency of this office, Dunlap 
found time for a certain amount of writing. In 
1814 he did some hack work on the Napoleonic 
wars. 14 Of much more importance was the "Life 
of Charles Brockden Brown," begun at the re- 
quest of Elijah Brown in 1813, published at Phila- 
delphia two years later, and at London in 1822. 
In commemoration of the last battle of the 
war, fought on January 8, 181 5, he wrote a play, 
"The Battle of New Orleans," which appears to 
have been staged July 4, 1816, and repeated oc- 
casionally for several years thereafter. 15 



II 

The State position came to an end late in 1816, 
and for the last time Dunlap returned to profes- 
sional painting. Since he was now about to enter 
on his major activities as an artist, a few words 

13 Professor Woolsey has about forty of these water- 
colors, including views of Lake George, Lake Champlain, 
Niagara, and Saratoga, which he pronounces "rather 
crude representations." See "Yale Review," new series, 
Vol. Ill, p. 780. 

14 See post, pp. 250-1. 

15 Mr. Oscar Wegelin, "Early American Plays," Publica- 
tions of the Dunlap Society, second series, No. 10, 1900, pp. 
39, 49, puts its first appearance on July 4, 1815, and says 
C. E. Grice's "Battle of New Orleans" was acted a year 
later. There is no authority in the newspaper advertise- 
ments or in Ireland for the earlier date, while all indica- 
tions strongly suggest that it was Dunlap's play which 
began its career in 1816. 



96 SBiUiamSDunlap 

concerning the status of American art may be ap- 
propriate. John Singleton Copley, whose un- 
charming but veracious portraits first gave this 
country some artistic standing abroad, had died in 
1815. Benjamin West was still alive, though 
seventy-eight years of age. Since 1763 he had 
resided in England, where he had become the un- 
challenged leader in historical and allegorical 
painting. His studio had been the class-room of 
American aspirants, and almost all the important 
painters in the United States at this time had been 
his pupils. 

Of the earlier generation of West's pupils were 
Gilbert Stuart and John Trumbull, whom Dunlap 
met in London in 1784. Stuart, who returned to 
his native land in 1792 and remained until his 
death in 1828, absorbed none of West's method. 
He confined himself to portraits, which he exe- 
cuted in a sure, fresh, and brilliant manner that 
was all his own, and that still gives him rank 
among our greatest painters. Trumbull, who 
finally settled in New York in 181 5, was greatly 
influenced by his master's historical work, a de- 
partment in which he likewise achieved prominence. 
He also possessed unusual ability for portraiture, 
but in both branches he often fell into mediocrity. 

Among the next generation of those who studied 
in West's atelier the most able were Thomas 
Sully, Washington Allston, and Samuel F. B. 
Morse. Sully spent but a year in England, yet 
on his return in 1 810 he produced some good his- 
torical canvases, and became a portraitist second 










William Dunlap 

From a rare contemporary lithograph 



2&iograpl)p feom \Sti5 to 1B33 97 

only to Stuart. Allston, while abroad, painted 
numerous imaginative pictures with more real 
character and harmony than West's. After his re- 
turn in 1 81 8, he was recognized as the king of 
American art, though he did but little work from 
that time on. Morse, who studied under Allston 
more than under West, came back to the United 
States in 1815. He was an able artist and painted 
various celebrities, but he gained no great success, 
and after several years turned his attention to 
electricity. 

John Vanderlyn had the distinction of being the 
first American to learn his craft in France and to 
acquire French methods of solidity and accuracy. 
He painted some very beautiful figures while 
abroad, and after his home-coming in 1815, he 
made portraits of many distinguished citizens, as 
well as several large show pictures. 16 

When Dunlap finally took up his brush late in 
181 6, the United States possessed a few highly 
gifted artists and a large body of minor painters 
of more or less ability. The prevailing influence 
was English, and portraiture was the general oc- 
cupation, though historical and imaginative sub- 
jects were sometimes attempted. New York was 
now the art center of the country, as Boston and 
Philadelphia had been before. 

For several years the city had had an organiza- 
tion of artists. Founded in 1801, it was incor- 

16 For preceding paragraphs see "Arts of Design" ; 
Samuel Isham, "History of American Painting," New 
York, 1905. 



98 iMliam 2DunIap 

porated seven years later as the American 
Academy of Fine Arts. After a dormant period, 
the institution was revived in 1816, in which 
resuscitation Dunlap had a hand. In 1817 Trum- 
bull was elected president and Dunlap a director. 
The latter was also made keeper and librarian at 
a salary of $200, with a room for professional 
purposes. The first exhibition ever given by the 
Academy was held in 1816. The second took place 
the next year, and to it Dunlap contributed three 
pictures: "A Portrait of a Lady," "Mary Mag- 
dalen," and "Christ on the Mount of Olives." 17 

In his new quarters Dunlap painted an en- 
couraging number of portraits for a couple of 
years, 18 but in 1819 his business fell off, and in the 
fall he resolved to try his fortunes in Virginia. 
After stopping a day or two with Sully in Phila- 
delphia, he reached Norfolk on October 23, and 
there he remained till spring. 

The third available volume of the Diary covers 
the Norfolk residence, and gives an interesting 
picture of Dunlap as an artist. I shall select a 
few details. His first customer was the host of 
his hotel, who ordered portraits of his two 
daughters at $25 each. Soon the commissions be- 
gan coming in sufficient numbers to justify him 
in fitting up a painting and exhibition room. Here 
he was visited by many people who seemed to find 

17 "American Monthly Magazine," Vol. I, p. 109. 

18 A family event of 1818 was the death of the artist's 
mother on the 27th of December at the age of eighty-five 
years. (Dunlap family Bible.) 



25iograjrf)p from 1BH5 to 1B33 99 

his studio a place of pleasant diversion; among 
his visitors he noted in particular numerous 
beautiful women and a band of Indians. His 
orders kept him steadily busy and brought in 
comfortable returns, although one patron paid 
with hams and other produce, and a second with 
lottery tickets which drew blanks. Southern 
hospitality was a source of much pleasure to him ; 
he found the food to his taste, except for the 
butter. He was sound in body and cheerful in 
mind. On December 2 he wrote : 

"Tomorrow will be seven weeks since I left 
home & six since I arrived in Norfolk — I have 
enjoyed good health — I have had my mind whole- 
somely employed generally, and I believe more 
uniformly so than for a long time before I left 
home. I have drank no wine & no spirits in 
any shape except a very moderate portion with 
my dinner — I have been better in mind & body 
than when I took wine at my dinner. I think I 
have improved in my painting — I have more con- 
fidence in my powers, more facility a better style 
generally — I have begun Eleven portraits amount- 
ing to $315. . . . For all this and much much 
more, I thank my Creator & incomprehensibly 
great & good Benefactor." 19 

In his leisure he frequented the theatre, made 
free to him by the manager, went to church, wrote 
often to his wife and son, and read largely as 
always. Among the books read were Rousseau's 
19 Diary, Vol. XXIV, pp. 54-5. 



ioo IMUam SDimiap 

"Confessions" (in French), "Ferdinand Count 
Fathom," "Humphrey Clinker," "Tom Jones," 
"Ivanhoe," "Don Juan," and the Bible with 
Clarke's commentary. 

From his remarks on the Bible reading it is 
evident that Dunlap had undergone a change of 
heart since the days of Godwinian heresy. He had 
given up his radicalism as had Brown several 
years before his death. Dr. Clarke's biblical 
criticism, which gave various translations for the 
same passage, he felt to be dangerous because it 
tended to unsettle belief and to raise doubt as to 
the infallibility of the Scriptures. 

On the 24th of April he left Norfolk after a 
residence of twenty-six weeks during which he had 
painted at least thirty-six portraits, including a few 
miniatures,— a very good rate of production. He 
had received about $1100 in all, yet he complained 
that he would reach New York almost as poor as 
he left it, because of large expenses. However, he 
consoled himself with the assurance that he had 
supported his family and opened a source of in- 
come for the future. 20 

Dunlap now tried to pursue his vocation in New 
York, but with no success; so he determined on 
Lower Canada, whither he departed in August, 
1820. At Montreal he found employment for 
two months, and then moved on to Quebec for a 

20 Owing to his absence from New York, Dunlap re- 
signed as keeper and librarian of the Academy. At the 
January election he was reelected a director, as he had 
been each year since 1817. This was his final term. 



2£>iograj)l)p from 1 BU5 to 1 B30 i o i 

week or two. Here he did not fail to make an 
excursion to the Plains of Abraham, on which his 
father had fought. His prosperity in the north 
was not great and his estimate of the Canadians 
not high; he found them cold and cautious in 
contrast with the warm Virginians. But he seems 
to have created a favorable impression at Montreal, 
for one of the newspapers spoke of him as a highly- 
cultivated gentleman, and compared him with 
West, Reynolds, and Rubens ! 

Norfolk was again to be Dunlap's winter abode. 
He arrived late in November, accompanied by his 
wife, and opened an exhibition room adorned with 
about sixty pictures of his own. Again he painted 
a goodly number of portraits, and returned home 
in June, 1821. 

The exhibition of large paintings was one of 
the commercial enterprises of the time, and Dun- 
lap, in the hope of swelling his slender income, 
set about producing a show picture. For ma- 
terial he instinctively turned to his master, West, 
and chose the rejection of Christ. He had never 
seen West's painting of this name, but he had 
read the artist's description of it, and had seen 
engravings of the separate groups. On this basis, 
with the aid of the scriptural account, Dunlap com- 
posed his picture. Before leaving Norfolk he had 
made a small sketch, 30 by 36 inches. On his re- 
turn to New York he procured a canvas 12 by 18 
feet, placed it, in the absence of a better studio, 
in the attic of his house, and went to work. All 
summer he toiled in the heat and bad light of his 



1 02 HMftiam SDunlap 

stuffy garret, and in spite of adverse conditions 
the result was very gratifying to him. In No- 
vember he took his canvas to Norfolk, where he 
continued to work at it when not engaged on 
portraits. "Christ Rejected" was finished in 
March, 1822, and placed on exhibition. Dunlap 
printed a pamphlet containing West's description. 
He expressed his obligation to that painter's treat- 
ment of the subject, but asserted that the com- 
position, coloring, and principal figures were en- 
tirely his own. The picture represented Christ, 
bound and wearing the crown of thorns, standing 
before Pilate, while the populace demand his 
crucifixion. In June Dunlap moved his painting 
from Norfolk to Philadelphia. He was pleased 
with its impression on the public, and surprised at 
its excellence when shown to advantage. In July 
he took it to Boston and Portland, at the latter 
town receiving from $200 to $300 in two weeks; 
then he sent it on tour about the East in care of an 
attendant. Subsequently it was exhibited with 
some profit in many parts of the United States, 
getting as far west as Urbana, Ohio. 

During the winter of 1822-3 Dunlap remained 
in New York, but received few commissions be- 
cause, as he frankly admitted, there were better 
painters in the market. He busied himself, how- 
ever, making a preliminary sketch for another 
large picture. The spring and summer found him 
in Utica and Saratoga, painting portraits and ex- 
hibiting. 

In the winter of 1823-4 he obtained a big cloth, 



2&iogra#)p from 1B05 to 1B30 103 

nailed it to the floor of his attic, and applied white 
lead. On this improvised canvas he began to paint 
"The Bearing of the Cross" from the sketch made 
the previous year. Christ was portrayed sinking 
under his burden on the road to Calvary. This 
picture was also sent on tour, but with less satis- 
factory results than in the former case. During 
the winter the artist became a member of the 
Lunch Club, with which J. F. Cooper, Halleck, 
Bryant, Morse, Bleecker, and Brevoort were 
affiliated. 

In November, 1824, Dunlap was astonished by a 
summons to Washington on a charge of having 
defaulted as assistant paymaster to the extent of 
several thousand dollars. Investigation, however, 
brought the deficiency down to one dollar, and 
that was found to have arisen from an error in 
addition. 

The production of other large pictures continued 
to occupy our artist. Early in 1825 he began a 
representation of Christ on Calvary, a subject 
which West had treated. As usual, he first made 
a cartoon, 25 by 30 inches, and sketched separate 
studies from life for the principal groups. Before 
this painting was completed, he commenced and 
finished another in imitation of West's "Death on 
the Pale Horse," of which he had obtained an 
etching and a printed description. Dunlap's picture 
was completed in less than three months. It il- 
lustrated St. John's vision of the opening of the 
first four seals as recorded in Revelation, Chapter 
VI. In the center, Death, seated on a pale horse 



104 IMliam SDunlap 

and followed by the ministers of Hell, was seen 
rushing forward over the bodies of his victims. 
He was accompanied by three other mounted 
figures, symbolizing the Gospel, the wars which 
spread the Gospel, and the Judgment. At one 
side a group of beasts were engaged in the destruc- 
tion of man. This canvas was successfully shown 
at the American Academy for three months, and 
later sent on the road to the profit of its owner 
and the intense admiration of the people, if we may 
judge from the poems and press notices it in- 
spired. "Terrible sublimity," "by one of the most 
eminent artists of the age," "a fearful representa- 
tion," "the greatest painting yet," were some of 
the extravagant terms employed. The picture was 
sold in 1833 for $500 and continued its itinerancy 
until 1840 at least. 21 

While Dunlap was busy in the painting of his- 
torical canvases, civil war had developed within 
the artistic fraternity of New York. The Amer- 
ican Academy was an academy in name only. No 
school of instruction was maintained, and the young 
artists who attempted to use the privilege of draw- 
ing from the Academy's casts were subjected 
to discourteous treatment, — a policy dictated, so 
there was reason to believe, by President Trum- 
bull. Membership in the organization was open to 
all on payment of $25, and of the eleven directors, 
only three could be artists. Thus the city was 

21 Descriptive pamphlet, Boston, 1840 ; "New York Eve- 
ning Post," October 28, 1825, and following issues ; Diary, 
Vol. XXX, p. 50. 



2&iogra#l>p from 1 Bfl5 to X B33 1 05 

treated to the curious spectacle of an art associa- 
tion run by lawyers and shopkeepers. Naturally 
the artists felt this an insult to their intelligence 
and a curtailment of their liberty, as well as a 
hindrance to the progress of American art. 

In 1825, at the suggestion of Morse, the New 
York Drawing Association, for the purpose of 
promoting native art and assisting students, was 
formed with Dunlap as one of the members. The 
association met three evenings a week to draw. 
One night Trumbull stalked in with the matricula- 
tion book of the Academy under his arm, which 
he demanded that they sign. They refused, but 
offered to unite with the older institution if six 
artists were elected to the board of directors. At 
the request of the Academy, the Drawing Associa- 
tion chose six of its members, one of whom was 
Dunlap, with the understanding that they would 
be placed on the board. Four of them not being 
Academicians, $100 was put up to render them 
eligible. But only two of the six were elected, 
and they immediately resigned. The Academy, 
however, retained the $100. 

Thus betrayed, the Drawing Association re- 
solved to exist independently, and early in 1826 
organized itself into the National Academy of De- 
sign. The membership included Morse, Dunlap, 
Inman, Peale, Ingham, Cole, and Durand. Morse 
was elected president, two lecturing professors 
were appointed, and an exhibition was immediately 
projected, with Dunlap as treasurer and a member 
of the committee on arrangements. The first 



1 06 IMItam SDunlajt 

picture display, consisting of one hundred and 
seventy entries (eleven of them were Dunlap's), 
was held in the second story of an ordinary dwell- 
ing-house at the corner of Broadway and Reade 
Street. 

At the start the National encountered much op- 
position and enmity from the American Academy, 
and a great deal of recrimination was indulged in 
on both sides, in which Dunlap's pen was not idle. 
But in a few years the new association was beyond 
the fear of hostility, while the American was 
slowly dying. 22 

For the next year or two we find Dunlap paint- 
ing portraits at New York and elsewhere, working 
on his "Calvary," and exhibiting his three large 
pictures about the country with varying success. 
Now they were the inspiration of sermons; now 
they were condemned by the pulpit, and the agent 
was seized for violating the law against puppet 
shows. 

In 1827 the artist once more turned to dramatic 
writing. The Bowery Theatre, a sumptuous new 
house, which had been opened in the fall of 1826, 23 
contracted with him to provide stage material 
which might parallel and compete with that of its 
rival, the Park. At the latter, Fitzball's "Flying 
Dutchman" was making a great run. Late in 

22 See "Arts of Design," Vol. II, Chapter XXI ; T. S. 
Cummings, "Historical Annals of the National Academy 
of Design," Philadelphia, 1865. 

23 Ireland, Vol. I, pp. 521-2. The capacity of the theatre 
was about 3000. It contained the first gas-lighted stage 
in America. 



2&ogra{>!)p from 1BH5 to 1B39 107 

May the Bowery, after considerable horn-blow- 
ing, came out with a play of the same name and 
with the same dramatis personce, which proved its 
mainstay during the spring and summer. Dunlap 
undoubtedly had a hand in the piece, though prob- 
ably he did nothing more than revise Fitzball. 24 

In February, 1828, "Thirty Years; or, The Life 
of a Gamester," translated from the French, was 
presented at the Bowery in opposition to "The 
Gambler's Fate," a British translation which was 
being featured at the Park. The American ver- 
sion found favor, and was repeated more than a 
dozen times in the course of the year. 

Dunlap's final play, "A Trip to Niagara; or, 
Travellers in America," was brought out at the 
Bowery on November 28, 1828. It was a farce, 
written to exploit a new scenic device called the 
Eidophusicon or Moving Diorama, by which a 
series of scenes could be displayed in rapid suc- 
cession, so as to produce the illusion of actually 
passing the objects represented. The Diorama 
was already in use at the Park in connection with 
Moncrieff's "London and Paris," but the Bowery 
threw its rival into the shade by the size and 
magnificence of the spectacle involved in "A Trip 
to Niagara." A panorama of the Hudson River 
was shown, composed of eighteen faithful repro- 
ductions, painted on the spot by competent artists, 

24 I base the assumption of Dunlap's responsibility on 
the fact that he included a play of this name in his 
bibliography, and that the "New York Mirror," Vol. X, 
p. 266, named "The Flying Dutchman" among his plays 
written for the Bowery. 



108 i©aiiam 2Dunla$> 

and so arranged as to pass before the eye much 
as though the spectator were in reality steaming 
up the river. After exhausting the glories of the 
Hudson, the Diorama followed the slender thread 
of the plot across the State, and ended with a "sub- 
lime" view of Niagara Falls. The entire series em- 
ployed the unprecedented canvas area of 25,000 
square feet, so it was said. Of course the play, 
with this gorgeous attraction, was a smashing suc- 
cess until the novelty-loving New Yorkers de- 
manded some other curiosity. It was given fifteen 
times the first month, a record which not even 
Kotzebue in his palmiest days could approach ; but 
after nine or ten performances during the next 
three months it disappeared. 25 

Meanwhile "Calvary," the painting on which 
Dunlap had labored for three years, and which he 
considered his masterpiece, was completed and 
shown at New York in May, 1828. It depicted the 
preparations for the sacrifice the moment before 
the crucifixion. In August a Dunlap gallery, con- 
taining "Calvary," "Christ Rejected," "Death on 
the Pale Horse," and several smaller pictures, was 
opened at the National Academy. 26 But this ex- 
hibition did not prove profitable, and the new 
painting was sent on tour. It met much hearty 
praise for its energy, its harmony of color, and its 
moral effect : but more than once it was criticized 



25 "New York Evening Post/' November 28, 1828, and 
following issues; "New York Mirror," Vol. VI, pp. I59> 
171. 

26 "New York Evening Post," August 8, 1828. 



2&iograpl}p from 1 B05 to 1 B30 109 

for the comparative obscurity of Christ. The eye 
was first attracted by the various groups, it was 
stated, and thus the picture failed to create an im- 
pression of epic unity. 27 

The artist's income, never large, had fallen to 
a very low figure at this period. His portrait com- 
missions were few, the returns from the show 
pictures were slight, and for the Bowery plays he 
received, as he said, "meagre compensation for 
poor commodities." In the hope of remuneration 
he began the "History of the American Theatre." 

About this time he became a member of one of 
the leading social organizations of the city, the 
Sketch Club, composed of artists and literary men, 
who met to draw and discuss art. Dunlap's un- 
usual club record, comprising the most reputable 
societies of his day, is proof of his powers of 
friendship and the attractiveness of his personality. 

Resolving to tempt fortune in a new field, our 
itinerant went to Vermont in the summer of 1829, 
where he painted portraits to some profit and en- 
joyed the hospitality of the people. Thither he 
returned at intervals to paint and exhibit. 

The National Academy was growing comfort- 
ably, the number of students was increasing, and 
more instructors were required. Accordingly in 
March, 1830, Dunlap was appointed Lecturer on 
Historic Painting, and in 1832 was made Professor 
of that subject, in which office he continued until 
1839. Among his colleagues was Bryant, Pro- 

27 "New York Mirror," Vol. V, p. 359 ; "American 
Monthly Magazine," Vol. II, pp. 263-4. 



no J©iHiam 2DunIap 

fessor of Mythology and Ancient History. 28 But 
the position carried no salary, and the painter was 
still sorely straitened. 

Sometime in the spring of 1830 he gained a little 
relief in a very pleasing manner. He received an 
anonymous letter containing $100, which pur- 
ported to come from Brown and other friends in 
the Elysian Fields, who, having found the bill 
floating about in that region where all things are 
to be had without money and without price, had 
sent it to one who could put it to good use. The 
recipient never discovered his benefactor. 

The following August was spent near Lake 
Champlain in the pursuit of his profession. While 
there he suffered a severe attack from an ailment 
which he designated merely as his chronic disease. 
For sixteen days he lay abed in grave danger, but 
he recovered and finished his portraits before re- 
turning home. 

The address to the students of the Academy at 
the awarding of premiums in April, 1831, was de- 
livered by Dunlap. He laid especial stress on the 
necessity for freedom and independence in an 
artist's activities. Patronage he declared to be 
obnoxious to a republican. Against the principle 
of patronage and protection, on which the Amer- 
ican Academy was built, the founders of the 
National had rebelled. The address was not a 
particularly creditable effort ; it was rambling and 
unnecessarily hostile toward the rival institution. 

28 Catalogues of the exhibitions of the National Acad- 
emy of Design; Cummings, p. 118. 



25t05tapl)p from 1B05 to 1033 1 1 1 

At the annual election of the National Academy 
in May, 183 1, Dunlap was made vice-president. 
This office was equivalent to a temporary presi- 
dency since President Morse was absent in Europe. 
Another show picture was hastily turned out this 
year, "The Attack on the Louvre," an episode in 
the revolution of 1830. It was pronounced a 
spirited and vivid canvas, but it failed on the 
road. 29 

The artist's finances remaining in a gloomy con- 
dition, he cast about for some means of relief. 
Two lectures on art which he delivered for the 
benefit of the Mercantile Library Association gave 
him the idea of placing his more important paint- 
ings in a room and lecturing on them. For this 
purpose the gallery of the National Academy, 
now located in Clinton Hall, was secured, and the 
historical pictures were put on display. The four 
biblical subjects, "Christ Rejected," "The Bear- 
ing of the Cross," "Calvary," and "Death on the 
Pale Horse," were arranged in a semi-circle to pro- 
duce a progressive panorama,— a series containing 
seven or eight hundred figures and nearly a thou- 
sand square feet of canvas. The doors were 
opened in February, 1832, and the public was 
urged by various periodicals to attend in large 
numbers in order to relieve the distress of the 
worthy artist. Two or three evenings each week 
Dunlap lectured on his works, a feature which 
grew in popularity until the gallery was filled 

29 Cummings, p. 122; "New York Mirror," Vol. VIII, 
p. 294 ; Vol. IX, p. 254. 



1 1 2 JBiHiam 2T>unIag 

every evening it was open. The conclusion of 
one of these addresses is interesting for the per- 
sonal note it struck. After describing "Christ Re- 
jected" the speaker said: 

"Such appears [sic] to have been the events 
which imagination had presented to the painter's 
eye, which, like the poet's, ought to elance from 
heaven to earth — from earth to heaven; but is too 
often chained by circumstances to a lot and 
thoughts very far below the exalted sphere to 
which he aspires. His ardent fancy shows him 
these scenes of interest and of glory ; but he has to 
labor often in poverty, and disappointment, and 
neglect, while striving to fix them on his canvas." 

In the spring this exhibition was moved to a 
museum at the corner of Broadway and Anthony 
Street, but here it was a total failure because of an 
epidemic of Asiatic cholera. 30 

The year 1832 was an important one in Dunlap's 
literary life inasmuch as it saw the publication of 
his "History of the American Theatre." It was 
dedicated to his friend, James Fenimore Cooper. 
It came from the Harpers' press about the first of 
November, and since it was issued by subscription, 
the author was at least insured against loss. In 
1833 it was printed by Bentley of London in two 
volumes. 31 From the English and American edi- 

30 See "New York Mirror," Vol. IX, pp. 254, 299, 310; 
"New York Evening Post," June 25, r, 2; "Arts of De- 
sign," Vol. I, p. 309. 

31 This edition is sometimes found in one 'ume with 
a new title-page and a frontispiece by uik nk. 




"TP: 



Townsend Harris's Receipt from William Dunlap 

for his copy of the 

"History of the American Theatre" 



sii, 



2&iogtapl)p from 1BH5 to 1B33 1 1 3 

tions the writer eventually gained some re- 
muneration. 

One of the most pleasant passages in Dunlap's 
biography, and one which testifies to the regard in 
which he was held by his fellow townsmen, be- 
longs to the year 1833. A group of citizens re- 
solved to aid the veteran dramatist and painter, 
who was now contending against ill-health as well 
as poverty. They decided upon a theatrical bene- 
fit, which should also serve as evidence of their 
appreciation of his long devotion to letters and 
art. A committee of one hundred prominent men, 
including Paulding and Bryant, arranged a per- 
formance for February 28 at the Park Theatre. 
The leading players of New York were enlisted, 
and in addition Charles and Fanny Kemble, who 
were then visiting this country, and Edwin For- 
rest, who came from Philadelphia for the oc- 
casion. The principal actors contributed their 
services, the entire Bowery company was offered 
unsolicited, and Charles Kemble, who was to 
receive $400 for himself and his daughter, turned 
over the whole sum to Dunlap. 

The program consisted of "Venice Preserved" 
with Forrest and Kemble in the major parts, a 
poetical address, several solos, vocal and instru- 
mental, and Dunlap's farce, "Bonaparte in Eng- 
land." Halleck and Bryant in turn had been asked 
to write the poetical address, but both, while ex- 
pressing the highest regard for Dunlap, declined 
because of the press of other duties. George P. 
Morris then accepted the responsibility and wrote 
a graceful composition, of which I quote a part : 



ii4 t&iHiam SDmtfa p 

"What gay assemblage greets my wondering sight ! 
What scenes of splendor— conjured here to-night ! 
What voices murmur, and what glances gleam ! 
Sure 'tis some flattering, unsubstantial dream. 
The house is crowded— everybody's here 
For beauty famous, or to science dear ; 
Doctors and lawyers, judges, belles and beaux, 
Poets and painters— and heaven only knows 
Whom else beside— and, see, gay ladies sit, 
Lighting with smiles that fearful place, the pit— 
(A fairy change— ah, pray continue it.) 
Gray heads are here too, listening to my rhymes, 
Full of the spirit of departed times; 
Grave men and studious, strangers to my sight, 
All gather round me on this brilliant night. 
And welcome are ye all. Not now ye come 
To speak some trembling poet's awful doom; 
With frowning eyes a 'want of mind' to trace 
In some new actor's inexperienced face, 
Or e'en us old ones (oh, for shame !) to rate 
'With study good — in time — but — never great.' 

A nobler motive fills your bosoms now, 

To wreathe the laurel round the silver'd brow 

Of one who merits it — if any can, 

The artist, author, and the honest man. 

With equal charms his pen and pencil drew 

Rich scenes, to nature and to virtue true. 

Full oft upon these boards hath youth appear'd, 

And oft these smiles his faltering footsteps 

cheer'd ; 
But not alone on budding genius smile, 



SMograpljp from 1B05 to 1B33 115 

Leaving the ripen'd sheaf unown'd the while ; 
To boyish hope not every bounty give, 
And only youth and beauty bid to live. 
Will you forget the services long past, 
Turn the old war-horse out to die at last? 
When, his proud strength and noble fleetness o'er, 
His faithful bosom dares the charge no more ? 
Ah, no— the sun that loves his beams to shed 
Round every opening flow'ret's tender head, 
With smiles as kind his genial radiance throws 
To cheer the sadness of the fading rose: 
Thus he, whose merit claims this dazzling crowd, 
Points to the past, and has his claims allowed; 
Looks brightly forth, his faithful journey done, 
And rests in triumph— like the setting sun." 

A large audience, not unlike that described by 
Morris, attended in spite of a severe snow-storm. 
The admission was $3 to the boxes and pit (the 
latter was arranged for the accommodation of 
ladies), and $1 to the gallery. The total receipts 
were $3194.50, and after deducting expenses the 
committee handed Dunlap $2517.54. The letter of 
notification read as follows: 

New York, March 5, 1833. 
Dear Sir, 

It has become my pleasing duty, as chairman of 
the committee appointed by the citizens of New 
York, who were convened to express their deep 
sense of the services rendered by you to the pro- 
motion of the Fine Arts, and to the dramatic lit- 



n6 i©ifliam EDunlap 

erature of our country, to inform you, that a bene- 
fit has been appropriated, in which many of your 
fellow citizens have had an opportunity of ex- 
pressing their estimate of those services, and of 
bearing their testimony to your character as a 
private citizen : for the proceeds I refer you to the 
Hon. William T. McCoun, the treasurer. Allow 
me, in the name of the committee, to congratulate 
you upon the success that has attended their 
efforts, and to add their fervent wishes that the 
evening of your life may be as happy, as the former 
part of it has been usefully and honorably em- 
ployed, in the advancement of the cause of virtue 
and of literature. 

Accept, dear sir, the expression of my personal 
regard and respect. 

DAVID HOSACK, Chairman. 

To William Dunlap, Esq. 

Dunlap's reply was this : 

New York, March 5, 1833. 
Dear Sir, 

It is with great pleasure I acknowledge the re- 
ceipt of your letter of this morning, from the 
hands of my meritorious young friend, William 
Sidney McCoun. 

Of the many gratifying testimonials connected 
with the event you allude to which I have received, 
evincing the good opinion of my fellow citizens, 
none will be valued more highly by me than the 
approbation of my conduct through life, mani- 



2&ograp!>p from 18H5 to 1033 1 1 7 

fested by the large and highly respectable com- 
mittee appointed by the citizens of New York, 
who were convened to express their appreciation 
of the services I had rendered to the fine arts and 
dramatic literature of our country. 

I must beg you, sir, to find language wherewith 
to communicate my heartfelt thanks for the honor 
the committee have done me. I cannot find words 
to express my sense of the feeling shown towards 
me. For yourself, dear sir, accept my thanks and 
best wishes for your future welfare. 

WILLIAM DUNLAP. 

Dr. David Hosack, Chairman. 32 



Ill 

The last accessible volume of the Diary extends 
from June 27, 1833, to December 31, 1834, and 
gives much information concerning Dunlap's 
labors and tribulations at this time. We find him 
this spring and summer working on the "History 
of the Arts of Design," a book which his friends 
at the National Academy had urged him to write 
as a financial aid. 33 He was also preparing some 
biographies for Herring and Longacre's "National 
Portrait Gallery." A novel, "Memoirs of a Water 
Drinker," had just been completed, and was await- 
ing the pleasure of the publisher. His brush was 
not yet laid aside, for in August he began two 

32 "New York Evening Post," February 23 to March 9, 
1833 ; "Knickerbocker Magazine," Vol. I, pp. 323 ff. 

33 Cummings, p. 131. 



n8 JMIiam SDunlap 

portraits, but no doubt his orders were infrequent. 
In all his work he was hindered by severe suffering 
from an ailment which his physician pronounced 
bladder trouble. 

On September 10, the Diary received this sig- 
nificant entry: "In Bank left $36.41. I always 
find myself poorer on settling my Bank acct 
than I had previously supposed." On the 26th, 
his account had sunk to $6.41. 

Yet in spite of his several occupations, and his 
financial and bodily distress, Dunlap found time 
and energy to serve actively on the committee for 
the benefit of T. A. Cooper, who had fallen on 
evil days, and to attempt the study of Greek under 
the guidance of his son. 34 In September he 
recorded: "Even now I have my alphabet & 
enjoy the opening of another avenue to knowledge 
although I may have time to enter but a little 
way." 35 

As the year lengthened, his suffering became so 
acute that he often resorted to laudanum to deaden 
the pain, taking sometimes as much as seventy-five 
drops. A good part of December was spent in 
bed. Yet the art history continued to progress ; 
he constantly received biographical sketches and 

34 By this time John A. Dunlap had become a promising 
New York attorney. He entered the practice in 1813. In 
1815 he published a large digest of the law relating to the 
justices of the peace, and in 1821 or 1822 another large 
book on the Supreme Court of New York. See New 
York Directories, 1813-14; "Analectic Magazine," Vol. 
VI, p. 419; "Literary and Scientific Repository," Vol. IV, 
p. 40. 

ss Diary, Vol. XXX, p. 41. 



2&iogra{rt)p from IBU5 to 1B33 1 19 

other information concerning artists whom he 
wished to include, and when able he worked at his 
manuscript. 

Early in 1834 the physicians diagnosed his 
disease as gall-stones, and recommended an opera- 
tion. "The remedy for this disease," Dunlap 
wrote, "has always appeared to me dreadful — but 
submission to my duty I hope may bear me 
through & a few years of comparative health 
may reward. 'Thy will be done.' " 36 The opera- 
tion was performed on the 26th of February under 
the direction of Drs. Francis and McLean. It was 
unusually severe. The patient was under the knife 
for more than an hour. When one considers that 
anaesthetics were not yet in use, one is not sur- 
prised that the memory of the ordeal haunted him 
like a nightmare for months. 

During the convalescence, his wife and daughter 
acted as nurses, and on them he bestowed more 
praise for his recovery than on the doctors. "I 
have had, and have, many blessings," he declared, 
"but those flowing from my family are the most 
precious." 37 His strength returned slowly, but 
as soon as he could sit up for a few hours he re- 
sumed work on his book. By April he was able 
to walk out a little, though it was not until fall 
that he left off the use of laudanum. 

On the 5th of December the "Arts of Design," 
published in two volumes by Scott & Company, 
was placed on sale and copies were sent to the sub- 

36 Diary, Vol. XXX, p. 65. 

" "Arts of Design," Vol. I, p. 308. 



1 20 IMIiam 2DunIa# 

scribers. 38 The subscription was surprisingly na- 
tional in scope ; among the points at which sets had 
been ordered were Key West, New Orleans, 
Savannah, Charleston, Norfolk, Philadelphia, 
Albany, New Haven, and Boston, as well as New 
York. The author realized some profit from his 
labor, though not enough to mitigate his poverty 
for any length of time. 

From this thirtieth volume of the Diary may be 
gained some interesting glimpses of Dunlap's com- 
panions. Washington Irving was a good friend 
who occasionally dropped in to spend an evening. 
On his return from abroad he expressed the con- 
viction that democracy was the best system of gov- 
ernment. After seventeen years of foreign resi- 
dence he was astonished, he said, at the contrast 
between our cheerfulness and ambition, and the 
discontent and anxiety which pervaded Europe. 
All which, Dunlap replied, he had known long ago. 
A closer friend was J. Fenimore Cooper, who had 
the habit of calling several times a week, and dur- 
ing the period of the operation was especially at- 
tentive. The convalescent must have been greatly 
cheered and diverted by the visits of this virile and 
whole-souled man. On April 13 he wrote: "J. F. 
Cooper with me about an hour almost wild with 
politics"; and on December 21: "J- F. Cooper 
calls and stays till 2 oclock full of politics and 
anticipations of evil." 

As usual, Dunlap was reading widely at this 

38 The edition comprised one thousand sets, and sold to 
subscribers at $5 a set. 



2Stogra#)p from 1BH5 to 1B30 



121 



time. Among his authors were Mrs. Shelley, Bos- 
well, Cooper, Walpole, Gibbon, Bulwer, Edge- 
worth, Defoe, Hugo, Moliere, and Pepys. 

For the remaining years of his life very little 
information can be obtained. He continued to act 
as vice-president of the National and in various 
ways served the Academy. He seems practically 
to have ceased painting about 1836. Literary en- 
terprises occupied his last three or four years. 
"Thirty Years Ago ; or, The Memoirs of a Water 
Drinker," which had existed as a manuscript in 
1833, was published by Bancroft & Holley in 
two volumes in the summer of 1836, and reprinted 
in a cheap one- volume edition in 1837, indicating 
that it met a ready welcome with the temperance 
societies to which it was dedicated. 

Dunlap's old age, like his whole life, was full 
of activity. Necessity was the immediate incen- 
tive; yet affluence would not have checked his 
efforts, for he had the habit of labor and took joy 
in his work. But his last years were saddened by 
the loss of his daughter Margaret, who died on 
June 9, 1837. 39 

This final period was devoted to investigation 
in the history of New York. At the age of sixty- 
nine or seventy Dunlap had conceived the ambi- 
tion of writing the history of his city and State, 
and with his usual energy had set to work exam- 
ining the records. From lack of funds to carry on 
the undertaking, he decided to publish a prelimi- 
nary text-book from the material he had so far 

39 Dunlap family Bible. 



122 3©illiam SDunlap 

obtained. 40 In the spring of 1837 appeared his 
"History of New York, for Schools" in two 
small volumes from the press of Collins, Keese 
& Company. 

Dunlap was reelected vice-president of the Na- 
tional Academy in 1838, as he had been annually 
since 1831. This year, however, he declined the 
honor on account of ill-health. Upon his retiring, 
the Academy asked him to sit to Ingham for his 
portrait, and a likeness was produced which was 
pronounced faithful in the extreme, 41 and which 
still hangs on the walls of the National Academy 
of Design. During the twelve years of the in- 
stitution's existence, he had been one of the most 
active in promoting its interests. Not only had he 
held various offices and served on numerous com- 
mittees, but in his "Arts of Design" he had been 
its first annalist. Furthermore, he had been a 
regular contributor to the yearly exhibitions. His 
contributions were mostly portraits, but biblical 
pictures, illustrations of fiction, and allegorical 
subjects were also among them. 42 

40 "American Monthly Magazine," Vol. X, p. 85. 

41 Cummings, p. 151. 

42 The following is a list of Dunlap's contributions to 
the annual exhibitions: — 1826: five portraits; three groups 
for "Calvary" ; "Barabbas and Thieves"— sketch from 
West; scene from the "Spy"; "Cupid Sleeping"— copy 
from Mignard; group of female figures. 1827: five por- 
traits, including General P. B. Porter, Governor Clinton, 
Anthony Bleecker, and the artist; a group for "Death on 
the Pale Horse"; a group for "Calvary"; "Female and 
Sleeping Cupid"— Cupid from Guido; "Saviour and Mary 
Magdalen in the Garden." 1828: nine portraits, including 
Hackett telling the story of Uncle Ben; two studies for 



25iograpJ)p from 1B05 to 1B30 1 23 

Of Dunlap's merits as a painter it is difficult to 
speak because so much of his work is either in- 
accessible or non-extant. But students of the sub- 
ject award him only a humble place in American 
art. Deficient in training and handicapped by the 
loss of an eye, he was ill-equipped for unusual 
achievements. He painted to keep the wolf from 
the door, and he wisely did the types of work that 
were most in demand,— miniatures, oil portraits, 
and show pieces. In his historical paintings he 
was a consistent imitator. Lacking creative 
imagination, he relied on West for subject-matter 
and method. It is interesting to note that the 
modest success of these pictures resulted in large 
part from this imitation,— such was the dependence 
of the early United States on the culture of Eng- 
land. As disseminators of culture through the 

"Calvary." 1829 : eleven portraits, including J. F. Cooper ; 
"Clio"; "Counting Chickens"; the "Historic Muse" (pro- 
nounced a graceful, well-drawn figure,— Sully considered 
it his best painting). 1830: nine portraits; "Calvary" (no 
doubt the small preliminary sketch). 183 1 : twelve por- 
traits, including the artist (said to be "one of the best 
heads ever painted in this country," perhaps the one 
shown in 1827); "Calvary"; the "Detection of Harry 
Wharton," from the "Spy" ; a study for "Christ Rejected" ; 
"Counting Chickens"; "Clio"; two studies for "Calvary"; 
"Little Girl Coming from School." 1832 : seven portraits ; 
"Holy Family." 1833: two portraits; "Artist Showing 
Picture to his Parents," painted in 1788. 1834: no entries 
on account of sickness. 1835 : two portraits, including G. 
P. Morris; "Richard and Kenneth," from Scott's "Talis- 
man." 1836: group of children. 1837: no entries. 1838: 
crayon portrait of Washington, made in 1783. For data 
see Catalogues of the exhibitions of the National Acad- 
emy of Design; "New York Mirror," Vol. VI, p. 354; 
Vol. X, p. 266 ; "Arts of Design," Vol. I, p. 305. 



124 l©iHiam 2DimIa£ 

less advanced sections of the country, they per- 
formed a not unimportant service. Bryant said: 
"We cannot call him eminent either as a writer or 
as an artist, but he did much by his large historical 
paintings, exhibited by his pupils all over the 
country, to give our people an idea of what a 
picture ought to be, and to awaken in them a 
taste for art." 43 Yet no doubt these pictures had 
a certain effectiveness in themselves ; for, according 
to a contemporary critic, "In these he has studied 
a free, bold manner, which, disregarding, and 
sometimes perhaps in too great a degree, the 
niceties of detail, aims at producing a strong gen- 
eral effect." 44 

But Dunlap's forte was portraiture, a branch of 
art in which he deserves higher rank than is com- 
monly given him. We have found his ability as 
a miniaturist to be considerable. And some of his 
oils are well above mediocrity,— a fact which 
students of American art often overlook. Among 
his best extant portraits are those of a Lady, De 
Witt Clinton, John A. Conant, Mrs. Thomas A. 
Cooper, and George Spalding. Perhaps the most 
distinctive quality of all these is their humanness. 
The last two, which have recently come to light, 
give evidence of unexpected talent. The faces 
are beautifully drawn and are full of character, 
the colors are rich and soft, and the whole im- 
pression is thoroughly artistic. The following 

43 "The Academy of Design," an address at the opening 
of the new building in 1865. 
* 4 "New York Mirror," Vol. X, p. 266. 



2&io0ta#>p from 1005 to 1030 1 25 

paragraphs are taken from the "Bulletin of the 
Worcester Art Museum" of January, 191 7 : 

"The Museum has lately acquired two examples 
of his oil portraits which in general excellence will 
come as a surprise even to those familiar with the 
best work of the early American school. One, the 
Portrait of a Lady, has much dignity and charm. 
The genial face in its quaint setting of dark curls 
and cap of creamy lace, the easy pose against a 
dark crimson curtain drawn back from an open 
window, and the harmonious color seen in the 
saffron gown and paler yellow ribbons, all com- 
bine to make a picture comparable to the work of 
Thomas Sully at his best. 

"The other, a Portrait of George Spalding, is of 
still finer quality. The young man . . . wears a 
dark coat, with the stock and ruff of the early 
nineteenth century. The smooth-shaven face and 
the fashion of the curling hair, drawn forward 
over forehead and cheeks, betoken the same period. 
In technique this portrait might well be taken for 
an excellent example of Dunlap's contemporary, 
Gilbert Stuart, and it is of special interest in being 
a first-rate piece of work by an early American 
artist who has hitherto been almost unknown/' 

Desiring to show their appreciation of his zeal 
for the cause and to aid in forwarding the "His- 
tory of New York," Dunlap's fellow artists ar- 
ranged a picture exhibit for his benefit. The com- 
mittee comprised Verplanck, Bryant, Morris, 
Francis, and several leading painters. Between 



126 t©illiam SDmtlajt 

two hundred and two hundred and fifty pictures, 
chiefly modern, were collected and placed in the 
Stuyvesant Institute. The display began on No- 
vember 19, 1838, to run four weeks ; the admission 
was twenty-five cents. Among the painters rep- 
resented were Cole, Durand, Morse, Weir, Jarvis, 
Dunlap, Inman, Ingham, Reynolds, West, Stuart, 
Allston, Sully, Copley, and Trumbull. The news- 
papers urged attendance. The "Mirror," always 
very cordial to Dunlap, declared that such a bene- 
fit was really a public duty because of his long 
services and his present misfortunes. That peri- 
odical asserted that "another such opportunity of 
witnessing in one coup-d'ceil the chef-d'ceuvres 
of many of our first artists will not soon be pre- 
sented." None the less, at the end of a month only 
about $200 had been cleared, and it was decided to 
continue the exhibition a few weeks longer. It 
closed on January 5, 1839, with a balance of about 
$1000, which was presented to Dunlap. 45 

He was thus enabled to proceed to the publica- 
tion of his work, but while the first volume was in 
the press he was stricken with paralysis. Though 
for a time he had sufficient strength to correct 
proof, yet finally the pen dropped from his power- 
less hand. His purpose, however, was not de- 
feated, for through the efforts of others the first 
volume of the "History of the New Netherlands, 
Province of New York, and State of New York, 

45 "New York Evening Post," November 17, 1838, and 
following issues; Catalogue of the Exhibit; "New York 
Mirror," Vol. XVI, pp. 175, 215, 231. 



25iograpt)p from 1 BII5 to 1 B30 127 

to the Adoption of the Federal Constitution," came 
from the press of Carter & Thorp about the 
middle of September, and the second volume a 
few months later. 46 

On the morning of September 28, 1839, William 
Dunlap died at his home in Greenwich Lane. He 
was survived by his wife and son. His body was 
taken to Perth Amboy for burial. 

Until his last illness his mind remained clear and 
vigorous. His acquaintances found his memory 
"a vast store-house of facts and anecdotes." 47 In- 
deed, it would be difficult to name a contemporary 
who had gone through a wider range of experience 
or known more interesting and important people 
than he, and not without reason was he considered 
one of the most attractive conversationalists to be 
met with. 

Dunlap's long life of seventy-three and a half 
years was one of continued devotion to cultural 
pursuits. He early swore allegiance to art and 
letters, and through privation and disappointment, 
in spite of obstacles that would have discouraged 
most men, he held his allegiance true until the day 
of his death. He had more than his share of afflic- 
tions, but his optimism bore him courageously 
through. In no sense a genius, he yet won for 
himself an honorable place in two spheres of 
cultural activity by dint of perseverance and de- 
termination. While deriving no little satisfaction 
from the distinctions and friendships which were 

46 Preface to Vol. II of the "History of New York." 

47 "Commercial Advertiser," October 2, 1839. 



128 J©iHiam SDunlap 

his portion, he was always extremely modest con- 
cerning his ability. He carried through life a 
lofty ideal, and in all he did he strove to serve the 
highest moral and intellectual welfare of his city 
and nation. 

His contemporaries warmly praised his ac- 
complishments, but especially did they pay tribute 
to his character as an upright and lovable man. 
The "Mirror" spoke the common opinion when it 
said sometime before his death : 

"Engaged for so many years in pursuits so 
various, active and exciting, in which he was not 
always kindly treated by fortune, and which 
brought him into conflict with so many interests, 
it might almost be deemed impossible that Mr. 
Dunlap should have escaped occasions of slander 
and enmity. Yet, few men have passed through 
life so free from reproach, and few are so uni- 
versally beloved. Mr. Dunlap, by general con- 
sent, bears that noblest of titles— an honest man. 
His manners are unassuming and kind; his con- 
versation full of knowledge and anecdote; his 
moral judgment true and delicate ; and his feelings 
warm and generous." 48 

*s "New York Mirror," Vol. X, p. 266. 



CHAPTER III 
The Original Plays 



WILLIAM DUNLAP has been called the 
Father of American Drama. How far he 
deserves this ascription of paternity can be decided 
only by first considering the status of dramatic 
literature in this country prior to his advent. 

The early colonists had little leisure and less 
inclination for theatrical frivolity. But by 17 14 
a play had been written and printed on colonial 
soil, — "Androborus," a political farce by Robert 
Hunter, Governor of New York. The real incep- 
tion of native drama, however, did not occur until 
the stage presentation of English plays had become 
an established fact. This situation was attendant 
upon the arrival of the Hallam Company in 1752. 1 

Stimulated by the frequent performance of 
"Richard III," "Romeo and Juliet," "George Barn- 
well," "Cato," "The Beaux' Stratagem," and other 
masterpieces of the British theatre, a few of our 
more adventurous writers began uncertainly to 
essay the dramatic. First in ability as well as in 
time among these pioneers was Thomas Godfrey 
of Philadelphia. In 1759, at the age of twenty- 
three, he wrote a tragedy called "The Prince of 

1 See ante, p. 32. 

129 



130 JMIiam 2DunIaj> 

Parthia," which was acted in i j6j. 2 It is not a 
very excellent tragedy; indeed, a modern reader 
would find its most tragic passages humorous. Yet 
considering its author's youth and the circum- 
stances under which he worked, it is surprisingly 
good, and American drama might easily have had 
a less dignified beginning. 

"The Prince of Parthia" was unmistakably con- 
structed according to the pseudo-classic conven- 
tions which were prominently employed in Eng- 
land during the eighteenth century. It is akin to 
Addison's "Cato," Thomson's "Sophonisba," John- 
son's "Irene," and other blank verse tragedies 
involving classic or oriental settings, the three 
unities, and stiffly formal treatment. In fact, God- 
frey's play bears a general resemblance to Lee's 
"Theodosius," one of the early representatives of 
the type. It also contains some Shakespearian 
reminiscences. The influence of "Romeo and 
Juliet" may be traced in the death of the lovers, 
and an echo of "Julius Caesar" can be detected in 
the supernatural portents which prelude the catas- 
trophe. "The Prince of Parthia" thus announced 
distinctly that American drama in its inception was 
to be no independent growth, but an offshoot of 
the English plant. 

The next two plays were written by men un- 
acquainted with dramatic literature, and reveal the 
extent to which our writers were capable of going 
when not copying definite models. "Ponteach" 
(1766), a tragedy of Indian life, was the work of 

2 Seilhamer, "History of the American Theatre," Vol. I, 
p. 189. 



€|>e (©riginal papg 1 3 1 

Major Robert Rogers, a frontiersman and Indian 
fighter. Somewhat to our astonishment, the red- 
skins are shown to be more sinned against than 
sinning. We see them victimized by the white 
man's rapacity and deception, against which their 
only defense is the tomahawk. "Ponteach" is im- 
portant as our first play to deal with American 
material, but it does so in an exceedingly crude 
and formless way. 

"The Conquest of Canada; or, The Siege of 
Quebec" (1766), by George Cockings, is even 
worse ; nevertheless it appeared on the Philadelphia 
stage in the season of 1 772-3.3 Utterly devoid of 
plot or structure, it is simply a chronicle of the 
battle in which the author has tried to include 
every detail. The poverty of the Colonial theatre 
in the matter of mechanics is suggested by a scene 
in Act III. The nocturnal expedition of the 
French fire-ships against the British fleet is to be 
illustrated. The stage is darkened, and not a per- 
son appears. The desired effect is produced by 
much yelling and bawling of orders behind the 
scenes. The next morning we are carried to a 
near-by nunnery, where the sisters dilate over the 
horrors of the past night. Humble, indeed, were 
the beginnings of American drama. 

In 1767 comedy began unpropitiously with "The 
Disappointment; or, The Force of Credulity," by 
Andrew Barton. 4 This wretched farce, which 
satirizes the then prevalent practice of searching 

3 Seilhamer, Vol. I, p. 302. 

4 Perhaps an assumed name for Colonel Thomas Forrest 
of Germantown, The play was to appear at the South- 



13 2 i©illiam SDunlap 

for buried pirate treasure, concerns itself with the 
scheme of several tricksters, who bury a chest of 
bricks and inveigle a group of gulls to dig it up in 
their quest for gold. Containing as it does some 
twenty songs, "The Disappointment" had the fur- 
ther honor of initiating American ballad-opera. 5 
The type grew up in imitation of the English spe- 
cies, which had been brought to a high pitch of 
popularity in both countries by "The Beggar's 
Opera" (1728) and its followers. 

The Revolutionary War with its preliminary 
events called out a few plays in defense of each 
party, all of them feeble from the dramatic stand- 
point. To Mrs. Mercy Warren, daughter and 
sister of the Otises and wife of General Warren, 
have been attributed four scathing satires against 
the British. The first of these, "The Adulateur" 
( x 773) » is perhaps the most interesting. It is com- 
posed in inflated blank verse, and represents the 
Adamses, Hancock, Warren, and other patriots 
under the guise of the Roman conspirators: 
Brutus, Cassius, Marcus, Portius, etc. 6 

wark Theatre, Philadelphia, but was withdrawn just be- 
fore its presentation because of personal reflections 
contained in it. See Seilhamer, Vol. I, pp. 177-8. 

5 The term ballad-opera properly applies only to plays 
like "The Beggar's Opera/' the lyrics of which were set to 
popular airs ; but it is commonly used to designate also 
those plays containing songs with original music. For 
discussion of the type see O. G. Sonneck's "Early Opera 
in America." 

6 See P. L. Ford, "Some Notes toward an Essay on the 
Beginnings of American Dramatic Literature," New 
York, 1893, pp. 15-16; M. C. Tyler, "Literary History of 
the American Revolution," New York and London, 1897, 
Vol. II, pp. 193-4- 



€l)e Original ptep£ 1 3 3 

The only other playwright of any importance 
whose name has emerged from this period was 
Hugh Henry Brackenridge. His two tragedies, 
"The Battle of Bunker's-Hill" (1776) and "The 
Death of Montgomery in Storming the City of 
Quebec" (1777), are of a highly rhetorical nature. 
The action is as slight as may be, but the deficiency 
is supplied by a succession of bombastic blank 
verse speeches. The former drama is a eulogy of 
American bravery. The latter is a violent denun- 
ciation of British brutality and treachery. Even 
the ghost of Wolfe arises to condemn his country- 
men and to prophesy the future glories of the 
United States in an oration of fifty-six lines. 

The English cause had champions equally rabid. 
Nothing could exceed the scurrility of the anony- 
mous "Battle of Brooklyn" (1776). The Ameri- 
can people are represented as stupid cowards and 
their leaders, Washington in particular, as degen- 
erate scoundrels. 

It is needless to say that the plays of the Revo- 
lution did not advance our dramatic literature. 
The writers were too much engrossed in the de- 
lights of reviling the enemy to pay much attention 
to more artistic considerations. 

A better composition than any since "The Prince 
of Parthia" was Peter Markoe's "Patriot Chief" 
(1784), though its excellences are but few. It 
is another so-called tragedy in the formal style 
then in vogue. 

The first American comedy worthy of the name 
was "The Contrast," by Royall Tyler, which was 
acted four times at New York in 1787, with sub- 



1 34 l©iHiam SDurriaj* 

sequent performances at Philadelphia and else- 
where. 7 It contains a well-defined and skilfully 
managed plot of considerable interest. The play 
contrasts the affected, Europeanized American 
with the sincere and sterling home-bred citizen. 

Royall Tyler's distinct contribution to our drama 
was a new humorous character, the Yankee. His 
Jonathan was the progenitor of a long and honor- 
able line of stage Yankees, commonly glorying in 
the baptismal name of their ancestor, and all inher- 
iting his ignorance and gawkiness, his shrewdness 
and honesty, his dialect and "darnations." Dialect 
had occasionally been employed before in Ameri- 
can plays, "The Disappointment" for instance, but 
Tyler's Jonathan was the first attempt to create 
humor by exploiting provincialism. 

For our purpose "The Contrast" is noteworthy 
primarily as the earliest sentimental play to be 
written in this country. As such it was the shower 
which preceded the deluge. Tyler's model, of 
course, was the emotional comedy of England, 
which had been so conspicuous on the British stage 
throughout the century, and which had also gained 
a large following in the New World. The purpose 
of English sentimental comedy was twofold: to 
correct morals and to arouse the feelings to a high 
pitch of activity. The former aim was generally 
accomplished by the reformation of a rake, as in 
Cibber's "Careless Husband" (1704) and Kelly's 
"School for Wives" (1773); the latter by the 
reuniting of long-lost brothers and sisters, or par- 

7 Seilhamer, Vol. II, index. 



€fje Original $lapg 1 3 5 

ents and children, and by the distress and final 
happiness of lovers, as in Steele's "Conscious Lov- 
ers" (1722), Whitehead's "School for Lovers" 
(1762), and Cumberland's "Natural Son" (1784). 
Sentimentalism developed a code of conduct all its 
own. The true sentimentalist was required to 
approach each circumstance of life through the 
heart, not the head. A poor man should be given 
a fortune instead of a job. Tears must be always 
ready to flow at any sign of distress. Parents, no 
matter how unreasonable, should be respected and 
obeyed. A lady should so guard her every act that 
no shade of indelicacy might darken her fair name. 
She should cultivate the art of fainting gracefully. 
A gentleman must be ever ready to forgive injury, 
and to throw away his sword when an enemy is in 
his power, — such magnanimity is the surest safe- 
guard of honor. Lovers must show the most dis- 
interested regard for each other's sense of delicacy. 
They may spout sentiments profusely, but they 
should never display spontaneous emotion. 8 

Apparently Tyler studied diligently in the Eng- 
lish school of sensibility, for "The Contrast" is 
entirely orthodox. There is a rascal of the name 
of Dimple who must be exposed. There is a hero, 
Col. Manly, and a heroine, Maria, whose happiness 
is balked for a time by a headstrong father. The 
lovers are as thorough a pair of sentimentalists as 
writer ever invented. Their sense of delicacy is 

8 For a complete discussion of English sentimental drama 
see Ernest Bernbaum, "Drama of Sensibility," Boston, 
I9IS. 



136 tBiHiam 2Dunlap 

awe-inspiring. Ridiculed by their gay and thought- 
less acquaintance, they pursue unperturbed the 
path of solemn rectitude which leadeth unto matri- 
mony. The curtain descends on the triumph of 
sentimentality and the discomfiture of the frivolous 
and still unmated scoffers. 

As Dunlap began to write, a few other plays of 
the prevailing types were coming from the press. 
In 1789 Samuel Low published "The Politician 
Outwitted," a comedy of a somewhat sentimental 
nature, containing a rustic character imitated from 
Jonathan. In 1790 were printed two tragedies, 
"The Ladies of Castile" and "The Sack of Rome," 
written by Mrs. Mercy Warren in the conventional 
manner. 

It can readily be seen that a playwright entering 
the field about 1790 would gain very little aid from 
the productions of his American precursors. The 
body of native drama was small (the majority of 
the plays have been cited above) and of quite 
negligible quality. Except that comedy should be 
realistic and more or less satirical, and tragedy 
vaguely classical in the eighteenth century sense, 
there were no traditions. But as a matter of fact 
Dunlap did not much bother himself about his 
predecessors. He was probably unaware of their 
existence, with the exception of Tyler. For his 
inspiration he went directly to England just as his 
forerunners had done. 



€l)e Original $Iap£ 1 3 7 



11 

William Dunlap's first dramatic offspring has 
long slumbered in an unmarked grave. "The Mod- 
est Soldier; or, Love in New York" (1787) is 
known to us only through the author's slight sketch 
of it in his "History of the American Theatre": 
"A Yankee servant, a travelled American, an offi- 
cer in the late revolutionary army, a fop, such as 
fops then were in New- York, an old gentleman 
and his two daughters, one of course lively and 
the other serious, formed the dramatis persona?." 9 
Written under the spell of the contemporary Eng- 
lish stage, with which Dunlap had become familiar 
during his recent sojourn abroad, and directly 
prompted by "The Contrast," 10 "The Modest Sol- 
dier" was undoubtedly a comedy of sentiment. It 
is safe to conjecture that the Yankee servant was 
a second Jonathan, that the modest soldier was a 
brother of Col. Manly, that the fop was of the tribe 
of Dimple, and that the serious daughter was as 
hopeless a sentimentalist as Maria. 

With his second attempt Dunlap graduated into 
the meagre ranks of the successful American play- 
wrights. As our author's first acted play, "The 
Father; or, American Shandyism" (written 1788) 
is perhaps of sufficient interest to warrant a de- 

9 p. 77- 

10 See ante, p. 14. 



138 J©iIIiam 2DunIap 

tailed synopsis, which may give some notion of his 
ability at dramatic construction. 

There is a prologue in praise of the moral stage 
of the New World. 

Scene: New York City. 

Act I. Mr. Racket, after a year of matrimony, 
has grown indifferent toward his wife, and spends 
his time in gambling and dissipation. Resolving 
to cure him by jealousy, Mrs. Racket affects a 
great regard for Capt. Ranter, an English libertine. 

Act II. Mrs. Racket's uncle, Col. Duncan, and 
his servant, Cartridge, plan to construct a mimic 
fort in Mrs. Racket's tulip garden, for which Car- 
tridge is devising a pair of guns from the Colonel's 
old boots. Duncan and Cartridge are very much 
devoted to each other and benevolent toward all 
the world. They are full of sympathy for the 
charitable Caroline, Mrs. Racket's sister, who is 
wasting away from secret grief. 

Act III. Caroline, sola, laments the probable 
death of her fiance, Henry. Enter Col. Duncan, 
who reveals to her his history — the old story of a 
secret marriage, and an infant son entrusted to a 
friend. The son was reported killed at Bunker 
Hill. Caroline in turn confesses her love for 
Henry, and describes a ring he wore, which the 
Colonel recognizes as one he had given his son. 
Ranter enters, displays the ring under discussion, 
and declares that Henry in dying gave it to him. 

Act IV. Henry appears, disguised as a blind 
soldier, in pursuit of his servant Marsh, alias Ran- 
ter, who has stolen his ring. The blind soldier 



€f>e Original pap£ 1 3 9 

assures them that Henry is alive ; Ranter swears he 
saw him die. Caroline, alternately exalted by hope 
and crushed by despair, finds ample occasion for 
fainting and tears. 

Act V. Scene: A dark hallway. Racket at- 
tempts to seduce the maid Susannah. Enter Ranter 
with Mrs. Racket, whose virtue he is assailing. At 
sounds of violence Duncan and Cartridge rush in. 
In the confusion Mrs. Racket gets into the arms of 
her husband, and a reconciliation follows. Henry 
now appears without disguise and, his identity 
established, falls into the arms of his father, Col. 
Duncan. 

The epilogue ridicules the play, and protests that 
the author should not be encouraged. 

The humor is entrusted mainly to Dr. Quiescent, 
an unbalanced physician, who obtained his degree 
at Edinburgh by a thesis on recovering drowned 
kittens. He is an "impenetrable coxcomb" to 
whom every occurrence is a reminder of some re- 
markable case he has attended. 

The reason for the sub-title, "American Shandy- 
ism," is apparent from the above summary. Col. 
Duncan is a close copy of Sterne's Uncle Toby 
Shandy, and Cartridge of his Corporal Trim. The 
Colonel rides Uncle Toby's hobby, mimic warfare, 
he has a potential Widow W adman in Mrs. Gre- 
nade, and he is as all-embracingly benevolent as his 
prototype. Cartridge says of him : 

"I have known him brush away the mosquito 
that bit him with his handkerchief, thus: 'I can 



mo JBiHiam SDunlap 

forgive thee/ says he; 'thou actest up to thy na- 
ture/ ... He will not let anybody, that has to do 
with him, kill any toads and such things, ... he 
saves from sorrow all that fall in his way— the 
man as well as the insect." 11 

But Duncan is only a formal imitation of the im- 
mortal Uncle Toby; whatever charm he possesses 
is reflected, for he lacks the breath of life. 

It is needless to dwell on the fact that "The 
Father" is a thorough-going sentimental comedy. 
It could hardly have been anything else. Not only 
was the whole tendency of contemporary literature 
in that direction, but Dunlap was by nature sus- 
ceptible to sentimentalism, being a moralist and a 
humanitarian. The main plot is of the lOst-rela- 
tive-found type, and involves the distressed-lover 
theme. The sub-plot is a reformed-rake episode. 
The dark-hall affair in the last act may have been 
suggested, as Genest has pointed out, 12 by Gar- 
rick's "Bon Ton; or, High Life Above Stairs" 
(1775), in which two guilty couples meet in a dark 
room, the husband by mistake taking possession 
of his wife. The intervention of a moral uncle 
heightens the resemblance. 

As the second play of a youth of twenty-two, 
"The Father" is 'distinctly commendable. Without 
much claim to originality, it shows that ability to 
discover public taste which is one of the essentials 

" Act III. 

12 "Some Account of the English Stage from the Resto- 
ration in 1660 to 1830," London, Vol. X, p. 197. 



€Jje <©tiginal $Iapg 1 4 1 

of theatrical success. To be sure it is overcrowded 
with incident, and contains several scenes and fig- 
ures which do not forward the action, yet it is 
brisk and entertaining, it is managed with discre- 
tion, and it should have gone well on the stage. 
The "American Quarterly Review" of 1827 pro- 
nounced it one of our best plays. "The plot," it 
declared, "is sufficiently dramatic to carry an in- 
terest throughout; the characters are well drawn, 
and well employed; and the dialogue possesses, 
what is indispensable to genuine comedy, a brief 
terseness, and unstudied ease, which few of the 
productions of the present era afford." 13 Genest 
said : "This is so good a comedy, that one is sur- 
prised, that it should not have been brought out on 
the English stage." 14 

The edition of 1806 made considerable altera- 
tion in the play, which was now called "The Father 
of an Only Child." The changes in the main were 
for the better. Some of the early crudity was 
removed, the style was more highly finished, and 
certain scenes and characters were more com- 
pletely developed. The Doctor was made more of, 
his amusing attempt to resuscitate a bundle of old 
clothes being added. The second edition was 
lengthened by about two thousand words, and 
was further altered by a rechristening of several 
characters, — for instance, Duncan became Camp- 
bell, Cartridge became Platoon, Ranter became 
Rushport, and Dr. Quiescent became Dr. Terebrate 

13 Vol. I, p. 350. 
" Vol. X, p. 196. 



142 i©tfiiaui SDuniap 

Tattle. The increased moralizing tendency of this 
edition suggests that Dunlap's managerial experi- 
ence had convinced him of the potency of the 
theatre as a social influence. 

"Darby's Return/' the interlude which the young 
playwright composed in 1789 for Wignell's benefit, 
drew all its characters from O'Keefle's "Poor Sol- 
dier," in which the comedian was a favorite as 
Darby. Dunlap imagined the mischief-maker to 
have returned to Ireland from his wanderings, and 
to be relating his experiences to his old friends. 
The first adventure — his involuntary voyage to 
Dantzic— and his career as a Prussian soldier 
were taken from O'Keeffe's "Patrick in Prussia; 
or, Love in a Camp," a sequel to "The Poor 
Soldier." Leaving Germany, Darby eventually 
reached America, a country which won his heart, 
as he tells the admiring throng. From the United 
States he made a flying trip to France and thence 
home. 

The author admitted in the preface that the 
piece was a hasty and incorrect sketch, which he 
had no idea of printing until urged to do so by 
friends. It has, none the less, a few points of inter- 
est. Dunlap was affiliated with the Federalist 
party, and the passage on France reflects the un- 
sympathetic attitude of the Federalists toward the 
French Revolution: 

"I went to France. I always did love quiet, 
And there I got in the middle of a riot. 
There they cried, 'vive la nation/ 'liberty/ 



€f>e Original pap£ 1 43 

And all the bag and tails swore they'd be free ; 
They caught the fire quite across the ocean, 
And to be sure they're in a nice commotion : 
'Down with the bastille, tuck up the jailor, 
Cut off mi tor's head, then pay his taylor.' 

Some took the liberty to plunder others, 

You may be sure I didn't stay there long." 

Further, "Darby's Return" is interesting as the 
first American ballad-opera to face the footlights. 
Though a brief affair of nine pages, it is a true 
ballad-opera because its two songs are set to popu- 
lar airs. 

The promise of worthy achievement held out in 
"The Father" was not belied in Dunlap's first 
tragedy, "The Fatal Deception; or, The Progress 
of Guilt" (written 1790), which was printed as 
"Leicester." The story is sufficiently exciting if 
somewhat extravagant. 

Act I. Lord Leicester is approaching Kenil- 
worth after a considerable absence at war, eager 
to rejoin his bride, Matilda. He comes upon Dud- 
ley Cecil defending himself and his wife against a 
band of assailants. Leicester rescues them, and 
persuades them to accompany him to his castle. 

Act II. Matilda is living in adultery with 
Henry Cecil, whom she has installed in the house- 
hold as her brother. She wishes to flee with him, 
but her husband's unexpected arrival prevents. 



i44 JMliam 2DunJaj> 

Matilda learns that her real brother is on his way 
to Kenilworth. Realizing that her deception will 
be disclosed, she convinces Henry that he must kill 
Leicester. 

Act III. Leicester takes Dudley Cecil to his 
own room to rest. Matilda and Henry approach 
the chamber. After a passionate struggle, he en- 
ters the darkened room and stabs the sleeper. 

Act IV. Leicester learns of the infidelity of 
Matilda and Henry, and vows vengeance. When 
Henry meets Leicester his consternation is great, 
but it gives place to anguish when he discovers that 
his victim was his own brother. 

Act V. Matilda attempts to poison Leicester, 
but he wards off the danger. Thereupon she stabs 
herself in his presence. Henry now enters as 
though to engage in combat, but instead runs on 
his opponent's sword and dies. 

In the preface Dunlap said : 

"To most readers, Matilda urging Henry to the 
murder of Leicester will appear as a copy of Lady 
Macbeth; but she is, in reality, more in situation 
like the Clytemnestra of the Greek poets : yet es- 
sentially different (independent of difference in 
merit) from both." 

The Shakespearian debt thus hinted at is consid- 
erable. As in "Macbeth," so here the guilty pair 
plan the destruction of an innocent sleeper. 
Henry's hesitation, Matilda's incitement, and his 
remorse are of Shakespearian origin. After the 
deed, Matilda exclaims: 



€l)e <©riginai pfapg 1 4 5 

"Henry, go wash thy hands 
And shift thy clothes, perchance some blood is 
on them ?" 

Henry replies: 

"Will water wash these clean ?" 15 
— a close parallel to the dialogue in "Macbeth," 
Act II, Scene II. Shakespeare's banquet scene is 
strongly suggested in Act IV. When Leicester is 
first seen after the murder, Henry is in a frenzy. 
Matilda tries to be calm, assuring her husband that 
Henry is unwell. 

The obligation to the "Agamemnon" of ^Eschy- 
lus is equally obvious. Both Clytemnestra and 
Matilda conceive a profound hatred for their hus- 
bands because of past offenses. Both women live 
in adultery while their husbands are absent at war, 
and slay them on their return. 

"Leicester" obeys implicitly the three unities, yet 
in its medieval setting and in the freedom of its 
action it marks something of a break from the tra- 
dition which had dominated American drama since 
its inception. "The Prince of Parthia," "The Bat- 
tle of Bunker's-Hill," "The Death of Montgom- 
ery," "The Patriot Chief," "The Sack of Rome," 
and "The Ladies of Castile" are all examples of 
the formal eighteenth century species of tragedy. 
"Leicester" may be classified as a semi-romantic 
tragedy, the product of many influences, namely: 
the Elizabethan revenge tragedy, the tragedy of 
fate, such semi-romantic tragedies as Home's 

15 Act III. 



146 IBsHiam SDunlap 

"Douglas" (1757), which was long a favorite here, 
and the recent Gothic plays. 

It is written in a blank verse which is more 
poetic and more nearly adequate than anything 
before it in this country. The story is told with 
considerable skill throughout, and in the murder 
scene with more intensity and power than can be 
found previously in American drama. Matilda and 
Henry are the most lifelike tragic figures that our 
writers had yet produced. To be sure, the play 
is loosely put together, and the action is often 
unmotivated, yet in force and stage effectiveness 
"Leicester" was the best native tragedy up to its 
time. The following scene from Act III is far 
superior to anything which preceded, and Dunlap 
himself never surpassed it : 

Enter Matilda and Henry. 
Mat. Softly. I'll steal and listen at the door. 
Hen. [aside] 'T is a hellish purpose. I ne'er 

shall do it. 
Mat. He's not asleep. Methinks I heard him 

sigh. 
Hen. He dreams of murder. 
Mat. Henry, what mean'st thou ? 

Remember that Matilda's life's at stake, 
Nor let thy fancy conjure forms of horror, 
To fill thy mind, and turn thee from thy purpose. 

Hen. O, no ! one image doth possess me all : 
A coward, stealing on the hour of sleep, — 
Of peaceful sleep, — stabbing the man that loves 
him. 



€lje Original $Iapg 1 4 7 

Mat. O, spare me, Henry ! cease such thoughts 
as these — 

Hen. If he must die, to-morrow will I meet him ; 
Then, as he views his ample fields alone, 
Or haply roams, by me alone attended, 
I will to single combat challenge him ; 
Sword meeting sword, on equal terms we'll strive, 
And he, or Cecil, fall. 

Mat. No ; thou canst not 

Mean it. Enough ! Matilda sees her fate ! 

Hen. I will do it ; I will no more trouble thee. 
I see the dreadful, damn'd necessity 
For murder. And now come forth, my unflesh'd 
sword ! [Draws. 

When my brave father tied thee to my side, 
Twas not for deeds like this. But it must be. 
Thou shalt drink noble blood. Angel of death ! 
Guide thou the point, and let me not strike twice ! 
Mat. Blood not thy sword ; mischief to us may 
follow. 
I have procur'd — a — 

[Hesitates, trembles, and draws forth a 
concealed weapon.] 
Hen. [snatching it] 'Tis well ; I thank thee ! 
Why ay, I thank thee ; this doth look like murder. 

[Puts up his sword. 
Is he asleep ? 

Mat. [listening] Softly. I hear no noise. 
Hark ! he did stir. No, 'twas the passing wind 
Did move the window. Tread lightly as thou 
enter'st. 



148 i©fliiam 2Duniaj> 

If he should wake ? Alas ! I'm wild with horrid 
Apprehension. Henry, thou shak'st again. 

Hen. Do I? Not much. Fear nothing — wait 
thou there — 
Pr'ythee let none come near while it is doing. 

[Partly in the room. 
Mat. Why dost thou not go in ? 
Hen. Tis light. 

Mat. [in great terror] Henry ! 

Hen. I dare to do, but dare not see it done. 
Mat. Ruin. 

Hen. O no, Matilda ! I cannot do 
A deed of darkness in the face of day ! 

[Throws down the dagger. 
Mat. I will nojt urge thee further, Henry Cecil : 
If thou wouldst give me up, why should I live? 
Hen. Nay, nay ; but then to see him when 
I do it : 
Think, think of that ; to look upon his f ace — 
Upon the face of him so lov'd, so injur'd ; 
And plunge yon weapon in the honest heart 
Which teems with thoughts to serve me! 

[She covers her face with an action of 
despair and horror.} 

Look not so. 
I'll do it. [Takes up dagger wildly, .] Do thou but 

only shut the light, 
And, when his heart beats upward to my hand, 
I'll meet it with my dagger. 

Mat. Hold thee firm. 

But one small window dimly lights the room ; 
That from within the castle I can reach, 
All unperceived. 



€J)c <©rigmai $**?£ 1 49 

Hen. [with the eagerness of despair] I pr'ythee 
do it then. 

Mat. When I shall knock twice on the window- 
board, — [Faultering. 
Then — Henry — then — [Exit. 

Hen. Yes ; I will go on ; 

Repentance and retreat are now denied me; 
Hell has ensnar'd — by Heaven I am forsaken. 
'Twas not a wayward fancy led me from 
My brother's roof, and happy native fields ; 
Alas ! all innocent, was I driven forth 
To fate, a lamb-like victim mark'd for destruction, 
Doom'd before my birth to horrible perdition ! 

Dud. [in the room as in sleep] O, Cecil! 

Hen. Hark ! 

Dud. O, Cecil ! O, my brother ! 

Hen. Some pitying spirit breaks through 
Nature's laws, 
And, unembodied, forms these solemn sounds 
Articulate, to warn me from the deed. 
Perhaps Lord Cecil, from this world releas'd, 
Yet hovering near, with agonized cries 
Would stay my hand, and save my sinking soul. 
It is too late. What noise ? Sure he has wak'd ! 
No — I wish he had. He never must wake more ! 
Again. It was the shutting out the light. 
Once, twice ; she knocks. Why then prepare thee, 

Henry. 
I shall not knock so gently at thy breast, 
O Lei'ster! Now, now to the dark, dark deed. 

[Exit into the chamber. 



150 i©tfliam 2DunIa$> 

As in the case of "Darby's Return," O'Keeffe 
furnished the suggestion for a return interlude, 
"Shelty's Travels" (1794), Shelty being the scape- 
goat in the then popular "Highland Reel." Dun- 
lap's piece was not printed, but the following 
synopsis of it from the "New York Daily Gazette" 
of April 23, 1794, gives some idea of its contents: 

"Leaves the Isle of Coll, Arrival in London, 
Meets O'Keefe, and lives by Story-Telling; Ban- 
ishment to Botany Bay; escapes and hides on 
board a Vessel bound to New- York; Meets an 
Algerine; Arrival in New- York; Peeps into the 
Museum, Play-House, &c. Conclusion." 

The clause, "Meets an Algerine," is the point of 
interest. This episode was the first dramatic men- 
tion of the trouble with the Barbary States, which 
later was to instigate a series of plays. Morocco, 
Algiers, Tripoli, and Tunis at this time were nests 
of pirates, who jeopardized Mediterranean trade 
by their constant depredations. Their earliest 
offense against the United States occurred in 
October, 1784. In 1785 several Americans were 
captured and sold into slavery. The continuance 
of such outrages led to a futile war, which lasted 
from 1801 to 1805. At the time when "Shelty's 
Travels" was written, this country was especially 
indignant owing to the increasing violence of these 
offenses. 16 About a month after Dunlap's inter- 
lude, Mrs. Susannah Rowson's "Slaves in Algiers" 

16 "History of the War between the United States and 
Tripoli," Salem, 1806, pp. 41, 48, 67. 



€fje Original papg 1 5 1 

was acted. Thereafter the Mediterranean corsairs 
reappeared but once in American drama until after 
Captain Decatur's successful quelling of the pirates 
in 1815. 17 

"Fontainville Abbey," our author's next play, 
was an innovation, as a synopsis of the plot will 
show. 

Act I. Scene : The hall of a ruined Gothic abbey. 
La Motte, fleeing the law against debtors, has taken 
refuge here with his wife and a fair unknown. The 
beauteous Adeline, we learn from their conversa- 
tion, was forced upon him, on the way to the 
abbey, by a ruffian, who at the point of a pistol or- 
dered him to remove her forever from his sight. 

Act II. Enter the Marquis de Montalt, owner 
of the abbey, whom La Motte recognizes as an old 
enemy. Struck with the beauty of Adeline, the 
Marquis forces from La Motte a promise to be- 
tray her to his lust. 

Act III. A dark, antique chamber. Night. 
Adeline finds a rusty dagger, a skeleton in an old 
chest, and a parchment revealing a crime. In an- 
other scene, the Marquis bribes La Motte to do 
away with the girl for some reason which he does 
not divulge. 

17 Later Algerine plays were "The American Captive ; 
or, Siege of Tripoli" (1812), James Ellison; "The Young 
Carolinians; or, Americans in Algiers" (1818), anon.; 
"The Siege of Tripoli" (1820), M. M. Noah; "The Siege 
of Algiers; or, The Downfall of Hadgi-Ali-Bashaw" 
(1823), J. S. Smith; "The Fall of Algiers" (n. d.), J. H. 
Payne; "The Usurper; or, Americans in Tripoli" (c. 
1842), J. Jones. 



152 !©tiiiam 2DunIaj> 

Act IV. Midnight. La Motte approaches the 
sleeping beauty to stab her. But his courage fails. 
He throws away his dagger, and swears to forsake 
his evil ways. The next morning Adeline explains 
that on the previous day the Marquis had seen a 
handkerchief of hers, containing a certain seal, 
which had thrown him into a panic. 

Act V. A court of justice. The Marquis ac- 
cuses La Motte of robbery. But the accused re- 
veals the conspiracy against Adeline, and produces 
the parchment. The Marquis now discloses the 
fact that Adeline is the daughter of his brother, 
whom he had murdered years before for his prop- 
erty. He had bribed the ruffian of Act I to rear 
her, and had recently ordered her death. The 
Marquis is led to execution, while La Motte is ac- 
quitted. 

"Fontainville Abbey" is graced with an epilogue 
spoken by Cupid, who complains that this author 
has twice banished him from his plays. He quotes 
the dramatist thus : 

"Too long," says he, "has Love usurp'd the 

boards : 
The tragic scene a wider scope affords: 
Each passion in its turn the mind should move. 
Shakespeare's best plays gain not their force 

from Love." 

But though Cupid may lose the tragic throne, he 
will still reign supreme in comedy, 

"For Love and Hymen ever are her theme." 



€lje (Original pap£ 1 53 

The preface reads : 

"This tragedy, founded on Mrs. Radcliffe's 
Romance of the Forest, was written in the year 
1794. . It was first performed in the year 1795, and 
with complete success. Mr. Boaden's play of 
Fontainville Forest must have been performed 
about the same time in London." 

Boaden's play, also based on the novel, was printed 
in 1794, and this adaptation probably called Dun- 
lap's attention to the theatrical possibilities of Mrs. 
Radclifle's book. That he was familiar with 
"Fontainville Forest" is pretty definitely proved 
by the fact that both dramas give the name of 
Hortensia to Madame La Motte, whereas in the 
novel she is called Constance. But here the evi- 
dence of borrowing ends. Dunlap's plot contains 
few episodes not found in Mrs. Radclifle's work, 
but of necessity he omits many of her incidents, 
and thus simplifies the narrative. The main al- 
terations are the omission of a lover for Adeline, 
and of the adventures in which she is involved 
with him, and the substitution of acquittal of La 
Motte for banishment. 

Dunlap was the first American writer to take 
a visible part in the so-called Gothic revival. 
Whether Charles Brockden Brown was respon- 
sible for his interest in the movement, or vice 
versa, at any rate Dunlap's initial effort in this di- 
rection appeared four years before that of his 
friend. As everybody knows, eighteenth century 
terroristic literature was inaugurated by Horace 



154 3©tiliam 2Dunlaj> 

Walpole's "Castle of Otranto" (1764), an un- 
blushing tale of marvels and supernatural phenom- 
ena. Walpole's most gifted disciple was Mrs. 
Ann Radcliffe, who in "The Romance of the For- 
est" (1791) and other novels attempted to create 
an atmosphere of terror without resorting to the 
cheap claptrap of ghosts, animated portraits, etc. 
Dunlap imitated Mrs. Radcliffe in method as well 
as in plot. Like her, he presented a series of mys- 
terious incidents, apparently arising from a super- 
natural cause, but followed shortly by a natural 
explanation. 

"Fontainville Abbey" was more thoroughly 
Gothic than any of its dramatic precursors in Eng- 
land. Such plays as Jephson's "Count of Nar- 
bonne" and Cumberland's "Carmelite" were 
Gothic only in their gruesomeness and in the mys- 
tery in which certain characters were enveloped. 
Dunlap took much greater pains to emphasize the 
setting; he carefully located each scene in unmis- 
takably Gothic surroundings. Such startling de- 
vices as skeletons, blood-rusted daggers, subter- 
ranean passages, and howling storms were freely 
introduced. In the use of terroristic machinery he 
was not a little like that incomparable Gothic 
dramatist, Matthew Gregory Lewis, whose famous 
"Castle Spectre" did not make its appearance until 
four years after "Fontainville Abbey" was written. 

Aside from its importance in the beginnings of 
American Gothicism, this piece has another claim 
to consideration. As we have already seen, 
"Leicester" departed to a large extent from the 






€l>e Original $lapg 1 5 5 

eighteenth century model, though still adhering to 
the unities. "Fontainville Abbey" broke entirely 
from this formal restraint, and became wholly and 
frankly a romantic tragi-comedy. As such it had 
but one predecessor, Mrs. Rowson's "Slaves in 
Algiers," acted a few months before. Dunlap's 
deliberate turning to the romantic type, exemplified 
in his first two serious plays, undoubtedly acted as 
one of the potent checks on conventional tragedy, 
for after 1795 that species almost disappeared 
from the United States. 

William Dunlap's chief contribution to Ameri- 
can opera was "The Archers ; or, Mountaineers of 
Switzerland" (1796). English opera (that is, a 
form of play with songs interspersed) was enjoy- 
ing continued favor on both sides of the Atlantic, 
and he knew that an imitation would be acceptable 
in New York. 

"The Archers" is preceded by a prologue con- 
trasting true and false liberty. 

Act I. The Swiss, suffering under the oppres- 
sion of Gesler, the Austrian governor, are prepar- 
ing to revolt. Rhodolpha, the Diana-like daughter 
of Walter Furst, joins the rebels with her band of 
fifty Amazons. 

Act II. The people are compelled to kneel to 
the governor's hat, placed on a pole before the 
castle. Rhodolpha humiliates a fat burgomaster 
who attempts to force her obedience to the order. 
William Tell preaches resistance, and is arrested. 

Act III. Tell saves his life by shooting the ap- 



15 6 i©illiam SDunlap 

pie from his son's head. By dint of great daring, 
he succeeds in killing Gesler. Then follows a 
pitched battle against the Austrians, in which the 
Swiss, led by Tell and assisted by Rhodolpha and 
her band, are victorious. 

To the play is subjoined a brief historical ac- 
count of Switzerland, from its first mention by 
Caesar, through the revolution. 

In the preface the author stated that two years 
before, an anonymous English opera, "Helvetic 
Liberty," was given him to adapt to our stage. 
Liking the subject, but finding the piece "incor- 
rigible," he composed "The Archers." He ad- 
mitted borrowing the burgomaster, an Austrian 
lieutenant, and Rhodolpha from "Helvetic Lib- 
erty," but added, "The other similarities are the 
necessary consequences of being both founded on 
the same historic fact." His debt, however, was 
somewhat larger than this statement implies. His 
outline is strictly that of the earlier play, and since 
history is equally violated in both, it is obvious that 
Dunlap got the skeleton of his plot from "Helvetic 
Liberty" rather than from the "historic fact." His 
chief alterations were a minimizing of the heroine's 
love affairs, and the addition of two humorous 
peasants. 

It is to be questioned whether the American 
dramatist improved much on his "incorrigible" 
model. "The Archers" is devoid of anything like 
character drawing or intensity of effect. Never- 
theless it furnishes opportunity for scenery, love- 
making, and martial pomp, the chief requirements 



€fje <©rigmal $iapg 1 5 7 

of a musical play; so a theatrical success might 
have been expected. Mr. Sonneck has said : "Dun- 
lap was not a master-poet, but merely a dramati- 
cally gifted stage-manager. However, it would be 
unjust to deny The Archers' some forcible mono- 
logues and skilfully contrasted scenes." 18 Hol- 
croft's verdict was this: "It [The Archers'] 
proves you have made some progress; but it 
likewise proves, as far as I am a judge, that 
much remains for you to accomplish. Common 
thoughts, common characters, and common sensa- 
tions have little attraction. ... If you would at- 
tain the high gifts after which you so virtuously 
aspire, your perseverance must be energetic and 
unremitting." 19 

If a play be acted under the title of "The Mys- 
terious Monk" (1796), and printed as "Ribbe- 
mont ; or, The Feudal Baron," one is not surprised 
to encounter some such plot as this : 

Act I. An antique castle. Ribbemont believes 
he has poisoned his wife, the Countess Honoria, 
and in a duel killed Narbonne, the man whom he 
was led to suspect of adultery with her. 

Act II. The Countess is discovered living in 
a Gothic chapel, cared for by Manuel, a priest. 
Manuel tells her that he caused a sleeping potion 
to be substituted for the poison which Ribbemont 
intended to administer. In another scene Ribbe- 

18 "Early Opera in America," p. 98. 

19 From a letter to Dunlap quoted in "American The- 
atre," p. 160. 



158 iBilliam SDunla jr 

mont receives a letter which explains that an 
enemy has duped him into believing his wife guilty. 
The son, Theodore, sets out to avenge the wrong. 

Act III. Manuel, perceiving Ribbemonfs deep 
contrition, is on the point of revealing the truth, 
when word is received that Theodore has killed 
the enemy, and is now in prison awaiting execu- 
tion. 

Act IV. The Baron visits Theodore in prison. 
The son begs his father to supply him with poison, 
that he may not be disgraced by a public execution. 

Act V. Ribbemont brings the poison, and both 
are on the point of suicide when the cry of "Par- 
don !" is heard. The Countess and Manuel rush in, 
and a reconciliation follows. Manuel now throws 
of! his cowl and reveals Narbonne, who had sur- 
vived the duel and assumed this disguise to protect 
the Countess. 20 

From this outline it is seen that "Ribbemont" 
is another Gothic drama of the "Fontainville Ab- 
bey" type. It is as free from actual supernatural- 
ism as the other, but its setting, its mysteries, 
and its wide departure from reality are hall- 
marks of the terroristic school. In the art of play- 
making "Ribbemont" shows no advance over its 
author's previous productions. Unmotivated, un- 
convincing, and filled with lifeless figures, it has 

20 In "American Theatre," p. 155, Dunlap said : "It may 
be remarked that the fable of this play can be traced in 
Tobin's posthumous drama of The Curfew, written many 
years after." "The Curfew," acted in London, 1807, tells 
a similar story, for which it may have been indebted to 
the American piece. 



€l)e <©rigmal pap£ 1 5 9 

few redeeming features. Dunlap himself spoke 
disparagingly of it: "The play is not skilfully 
managed." "The characters and incidents were 
not in sufficient number, and the piece ... is long 
since forgotten." 21 The blank verse, which shows 
a careful study of Shakespeare, is superior to the 
average of that time, but the conventionally the- 
atrical and useless speeches are too numerous to 
allow the style any claim to excellence. 

"The Man of Fortitude ; or, The Knight's Ad- 
venture" (1797) seems to have occasioned a con- 
troversy between the director of the theatre and 
the star actor. In the "History of the American 
Theatre" we find this passage : 

"The person we have designated the American 
manager, had written a piece in one act for the 
stage, and called it 'The Knight's Adventure.' It 
was in blank verse. He left it with Mr. Hodgkin- 
son, and it was almost forgotten, when Hodgkin- 
son told him that he had written a play, and called 
it The Man of Fortitude.' This was the whole of 
The Knight's Adventure,' partly in prose, with the 
addition of a comic buffoon, and a lady. The au- 
thor of the piece remarked this to Hodgkinson, 
who did not deny it, only said he had 'altered 
everything,' and truly everything was altered. . . . 
The other laughed and asked for his one-act piece, 
but it was not forthcoming. . . . We scarcely be- 
lieve the author was conscious of wrong in the 

21 "American Theatre," pp. 154-5. 



1 60 i©tfttam SDunlap 

transaction, as far as injury to another was con- 
cerned." 22 

Just what share in the finished play each man 
had, cannot now be determined, but Dunlap must 
have felt that it was largely his, because he in- 
cluded it in the prospectus of his ten-volume edi- 
tion. 23 The finished plot is replete with thrills. 

Act I. Scene : France. Time : Evening. A storm 
rages on a gloomy heath with an accompaniment 
of thunder and lightning. Sir Bertrand and his 
valet are seeking shelter. From peasants they 
learn of a haunted castle in a forest not far dis- 
tant. The scene shifts to the castle. The storm 
continues. Blue lights flicker before the windows. 
A bell tolls. At Bertrand's approach, the door 
flies open. Within, a bloody spectre beckons to 
the knight, who draws his sword, whereupon the 
floor parts, and both disappear. The valet is 
seized by furies and spirited away. 

Act II. A subterranean cavern. The spectres, 
having removed their disguises, now appear as rob- 
bers. The captain, against the remonstrances of 
his band, inclines to mercy. He confesses to Ber- 
trand his love for a female prisoner, who spurns 
his advances. The lady is produced and proves to 
be Sir Bertrand's bride, stolen on their wedding- 
day. The captain, holding this to be a ruse, orders 
that the knight be tortured. 

Act III. Bertrand is placed on the wheel. 

22 p. 171. 

23 See ante, p. 85 n. 



€fje Original $lap£ 1 6 1 

Hortensia offers to yield to the captain's desire, 
but as he approaches her she draws a dagger and 
prepares to stab him. Overwhelmed by her hero- 
ism and devotion, he relents and frees both. Ber- 
trand now promises a royal pardon. 

It may be safely assumed that Dunlap's original 
plot was not greatly different from this, with the 
exception of the Hortensia element. The spectres 
and banditti are undoubtedly his. Here again is 
a Gothic tragi-comedy, which eliminates the super- 
natural by solving all the mysteries, — Mrs. Rad- 
cliffe's method once more. 

The central idea of Dunlap's one-act piece — the 
supposedly haunted castle, inhabited by robbers, 
who threaten but spare the life of the hero — was 
unquestionably taken from "Caleb Williams." In 
Chapters XXVIII and XXIX of Godwin's novel, 
Caleb falls among thieves, whose den is a ruined 
castle in a forest near a deserted heath. The 
superstitious peasantry believe the ruin haunted, 
because of the lights and nocturnal revelry. The 
hero's life is threatened by certain members of the 
gang, but the leader, Raymond, saves him. Be- 
tween Raymond and the captain in the play there 
is an important parallel. Both outlaws took up 
arms against society in their rage over the iniquity 
of the ruling class and the inequality of the laws. 

Dunlap's bandit plot, however, was not due 
solely to "Caleb Williams." It was one of the 
numerous offspring of "Die Rauber." This drama 
of the youthful Schiller emerged from the press in 
1 78 1, and immediately became famous all over 



1 6 2 KMIiam 2DunIaj> 

Europe. Its protagonist is Karl Moor, who, hav- 
ing fallen into loose ways at the university, is dis- 
inherited by his father. Thereupon the desperate 
youth places himself at the head of a robber band. 
After a career of outlawry, he repents and sur- 
renders himself to justice. 

The earliest English imitation of "Die Rauber" 
was O'Keeffe's "Castle of Andalusia," which be- 
gan a brilliant run at Covent Garden in 1782. 24 In 
this light opera, Don Ccesar has been driven to 
lawlessness by the persecution of his father. In 
the end he renounces his bandit life. Another ap- 
parent imitation was "Robin Hood; or, Sherwood 
Forest" (1784), an opera by Leonard MacNally. 
The Earl of Huntingdon, suffering under the in- 
justice of the king, takes to the forest, but finally 
returns to lawful ways. "The Battle of Hexham" 
(1789), by the younger Colman, also contains a 
bandit episode involving a similar idea. To Amer- 
ica the robber motif was introduced by "The 
Castle of Andalusia" in 1788. In 1793 Tytler's 
translation of "Die Rauber," made in England in 
1792, was reprinted in New York. "The Battle of 
Hexham" was acted at New York in 1794. "Robin 
Hood" was given twice at New York in the same 
year. The American premiere of "The Robbers" 
occurred at the same city in 1795. 25 Our earliest 
contribution to the drama of outlawry was "Edwin 



24 Genest, Vol. VI, p. 263. 

25 Seilhamer, Vol. II, p. 242; Vol. Ill, pp. 80-1, 108; E. 
C. Parry, "German American Annals," new series, Vol. 
Ill, p. 86; C. F. Brede, same journal, p. 257. 



. €tje Original $Iap£ 1 63 

and Angelina," an opera by Elihu Hubbard Smith, 
performed for the first time in December, 1796, 
but written some years before. 26 Here recurs the 
Schiller formula of injustice leading to a bandit 
life, with the repentance and reform finale. 

With such antecedents, the source of the robber 
theme in "The Knight's Adventure" is not far to 
seek. Supposing it to have been written about 
1796, Dunlap had opportunity to read "Die Rau- 
ber" in translation, and to witness it on the stage, 
along with "The Castle of Andalusia," "Robin 
Hood," and "The Battle of Hexham." "Edwin 
and Angelina," the work of a close friend, he un- 
doubtedly saw in manuscript. With such incen- 
tives, it is entirely characteristic of Dunlap that he 
should seize on the striking episode in Godwin's 
novel, and turn it into a drama. "The Man of 
Fortitude" was the second American robber play 
to appear on the stage, Smith's opera preceding it 
by a few months. 

In 1780 occurred one of the most dramatic 
events of the Revolutionary War, the capture of 
Major John Andre. Because of the possible con- 
sequences involved in the Arnold-Andre con- 
spiracy, and because of the admirable character of 
the British spy, the effect produced by the incident 
was most profound. Indeed, ever since, it has oc- 
cupied a place in the American mind considerably 
out of proportion to its historic importance. Play- 
wrights have made capital of it over and over 

26 "American Theatre," p. 156 ; preface to the opera. 



1 64 iMIiam 2Duntap 

again. 27 Dunlap was not the first to dramatize 
the theme, but, as Professor Brander Matthews 
has said: "Of all the plays on the subject of 
Arnold's treason and Andre's sad fate, the 'Andre' 
of William Dunlap is easily best, both as literature 
and as a successful acting drama." 28 

The preface, written in 1798, reads in part: 

"More than nine years ago the author made 
choice of the death of Major Andre as the subject 
of a Tragedy, and part of what is now offered to 
the public was written at that time. Many circum- 
stances discouraged him from finishing his play, 
and among them must be reckoned a prevailing 
opinion that recent events are unfit subjects for 
tragedy." 

The prologue apologizes for violating this 
opinion and for altering the historic facts. A 
judgment of the play on its own merits, unpreju- 
diced by party spirit, is requested. 

Act I. Andre has been captured, and is 
awaiting execution. Capt. Bland, an American 
officer, resolves to aid the doomed man if possible, 
out of gratitude for his assistance when Bland 
was a British prisoner. 

Act II. The prison. Andre, solus, laments the 

27 See Seilhamer, Vol. Ill, pp. 12, 363 ; "Andre," Pub- 
lications of the Dunlap Society, No. 4, 1887, introduction. 
In addition, "Major Andre," by Gyde Fitch, should be 
mentioned. 

28 "Andre," Publications of the Dunlap Society, intro- 
duction, p. xxiv. 



€l)e Original §Mapg 1 65 

disgrace which has fallen on him. Bland enters 
and declares he shall not die. The spy asks only 
that the sentence be altered from hanging to 
shooting. 

Act III. Bland pleads with Washington (des- 
ignated as the General) for the life of his 
friend, but without avail. In his wrath he tears 
the cockade from his helmet. Bland's mother 
enters the camp and begs that Andre be spared in 
order to save her husband, who is held by the 
British as a hostage for the safety of the captive. 

Act IV. Bland's ire flames again, and he in- 
sults his superior officer. Honora, Andre's some- 
time fiancee, who has come from England seeking 
him, enters the prison and faints in his arms. He 
had been led by her father to believe that she had 
married another, but he now learns of the de- 
ception. 

Act V. Bland apologizes for his insubordina- 
tion. 29 Honora beseeches Washington to pardon 
her lover. Upon his refusal, she becomes insane 
and is led away by Mrs. Bland. In the final scene 
Andre goes bravely to execution. 

In an appendix to the play, Dunlap printed a 
number of documents which show the relation of 
the tragedy to history. We learn that Andre was 
once engaged to Honora Seward. But the ro- 

29 The preface contains twenty-nine additional lines to 
be inserted here, in which Bland replaces the cockade, de- 
claring that he will wear it thenceforth as his proudest 
ornament. The play was in print before it was acted; 
hence the alteration which the first audience seemed to 
demand could not be inserted in the text itself. 



1 66 UDilliam SDunlap 

mance was blighted by parental opposition, and 
Honora consoled herself by marrying another 
man. There are some letters called out by the 
trial. In one of these Andre requested that he 
be shot rather than hanged. In another he spoke 
of certain prisoners, held by the British at Charles- 
ton, whose treatment might be largely affected by 
his own. Dunlap, then, had some basis for the 
love affair with Honora, though in reality it took 
a much less romantic turn than in the drama. The 
spy's efforts to obtain the substitution of shooting 
for hanging were founded on fact. The B lands 
were invented for the occasion, but the idea of a 
hostage was probably suggested by Andre's ref- 
erence to the Charleston prisoners. 

Several plays before "Andre" had dealt with 
American history, but Dunlap's tragedy surpassed 
them all. In general the early historical dramas 
were unusually poor affairs, and for this reason 
"Andre's" modest merit may be easily overesti- 
mated. Professor Matthews spoke perhaps too 
enthusiastically when he said : " 'Andre' is a better 
piece of work than most of the plays even of high 
pretensions, which were produced in Great Britain 
and the United States toward the end of the last 
century." 30 Yet it must be classed among the 
most worthy efforts of our early dramatists. To be 
sure, it is artificial and sentimental, but on the 
whole it is rather satisfying. The characters are 
consistently if slightly drawn. The tone reaches a 

30 "Andre," Publications of the Dunlap Society, intro- 
duction, p. xiii. 



€fje Original pfopg 1 6 7 

certain degree of intensity in places, especially in 
Honora's grief. The blank verse is even and dig- 
nified, free both from puerility and from inspira- 
tion. 

That Dunlap knew to some extent and admired 
Elizabethan drama is proved by "The Italian 
Father" (1799). In the preface he said: "Those 
who are well versed in old english dramatic lit- 
erature, will perceive that the author has enriched 
his work from those obsolete sources without 
forfeiting his claim to originality in the composi- 
tion." Dekker it was whom he pressed into 
service, as the "History of the American Theatre" 
acknowledged. But the borrowing was not suffi- 
cient in Dunlap's eyes to destroy his pride in the 
play, for he considered this to be his best dramatic 
achievement. 31 Unfortunately, a comparison of 
"The Italian Father" with "The Honest Whore," 
part two, reveals an amount of plagiarism which 
leaves him only a meagre remnant to call his own. 

Act I. Hippolito, a prominent citizen of Milan, 
is accosted by Astrabel with the entreaty that he 
save her husband, Beraldo, condemned to die for 
dueling. Hippolito learns that her father, Michael 
Brazzo, has disowned her for unchastity. 

Act II. Beraldo returns from prison, having 
been liberated by Hippolito' s intercession. Brazzo, 
disguised as a servant, enters the household of 
his daughter in order to study her and to help 
her if she proves worthy. He is immediately con- 

31 "American Theatre," p. 266. 



j 68 J©iDiam SDunlap 

vinced that Astrabel has reformed, but decides to 
make a final test. For this purpose he induces 
Hippolito to tempt her to incontinence again. 

Act III. Hippolito assails her chastity by 
means of jewels and tender epistles. He also 
sends rich gifts to Beraldo, who returns them, re- 
fusing to sell his wife. 

Act IV. The jealousy of Hippolito 's wife, 
Beatrice, is aroused by his attentions to Astrabel, 
and is allayed with some difficulty. Beraldo is on 
the point of fighting with Hippolito over the honor 
of Astrabel, when Brazzo intervenes and explains 
that it was all a test, which both husband and wife 
have stood admirably. 

Act V. Brazzo, satisfied w T ith AstrabeVs con- 
duct and convinced of her love for him, reveals 
himself and forgives her. 

The outline of the play was taken bodily from 
"The Honest Whore." Each of Dunlap's characters 
has an exact prototype in Dekker. Hippolito is 
Dekker's Hippolito, Beatrice is Infelice, Astrabel 
is Bellafront, Beraldo is Matheo (one of Dekker's 
minor figures is called Beraldo), Brazzo is Or- 
lando Friscobaldo (disguised in both plays as 
Pacheco). The resemblance is especially strong 
in the first two acts, in which our author even took 
sections of dialogue verbatim from his source. 
The chief departures from the original are two: 
Dekker's Hippolito tempts Bellafront from an 
evil motive; in "The Italian Father" the tempta- 
tion is only a test. Matheo is a thorough rascal, 
who at the end is saved from a deserved death on 



€f>e Original $Iap£ 1 69 

the scaffold only by the intervention of Frisco- 
baldo ; Beraldo, on the other hand, is but super- 
ficially bad. Once an honorable man, he has been 
forced by circumstances into evil ways; in the 
crisis his better self regains the ascendancy. 

Dunlap's originality asserted itself in the sub- 
plot. Abandoning Dekker altogether, he substi- 
tuted one somewhat suggestive of the comic ele- 
ment in "Twelfth Night." Lodovico (the name 
from Dekker), a merry friend of Hippolito's, de- 
clares his passion for Leonora, Beatrice's maid. 
With the help of the fool she leads him on, only 
to play a ridiculous trick on him in the end. This 
sub-plot is pretty good humor, quite after the 
Elizabethan manner both in its farcical vivacity 
and its word-play. 

With all respect to Dekker be it said that in 
certain respects Dunlap improved on his source. 
"The Italian Father" is simpler in construction and 
more closely knit, because several superfluous 
characters are removed, and the sub-plot is brought 
into closer relation with the main plot. Dunlap's 
prose diction is clearer than Dekker's mixture of 
prose, rhyme, and blank verse. In other words 
the American playwright used his well-developed 
technical skill to reconstruct the piece according 
to the canons of the contemporary stage. The re- 
sult was a theatrically successful drama. But in 
its less superficial aspects the original far sur- 
passes the imitation. Friscobaldo is a great 
character; Brazzo is only a stage figure. Bella- 
front is a very human woman; Astrabel is a 



17° f©illiam SDunlap 

formal echo. Matheo is a persistently evil man; 
Beraldo is an easily manipulated puppet. 

It is not difficult to understand why Dunlap 
should have turned to "The Honest Whore" for 
dramatic material. It is an example of Eliza- 
bethan sensibility, though uncontaminated by the 
mawkish, lacrymose sentimentality that deluged 
the eighteenth century with tears. The New York 
playwright saw that this tale of family distress 
and reconciliation was congenial to the taste of 
his time, and he proceeded to adapt it to his the- 
atre with certain expurgations. It was a tenet of 
the sentimental school that virtue is more potent 
than vice ; that a good man is always good, and an 
evil man may be suddenly and violently converted. 
According to this philosophy Dunlap revised "The 
Honest Whore." Hippolito's fall from virtue he 
deleted, making him instead a constant champion 
of morals. And Beraldo, unlike his prototype, 
undergoes a complete change of heart. 

"Tristram Shandy" was apparently one of Dun- 
lap's favorite books, for ten years after "The 
Father" he again paid it the tribute of adaptation. 
He took, as the foundation for his second play, 
an incident recorded briefly in Chapter XXIV of 
the last book of Sterne's eccentric novel. Maria, 
the village beauty, having lost her senses when 
her banns were forbidden, now sits all day on a 
bank, plaintively playing on her pipe. On this 
slender theme Dunlap constructed an opera, 
"Sterne's Maria; or, The Vintage,"— with what 



€l)e (©riginal pap£ 1 7 1 

success it is impossible to say, since it was never 
printed. Our only information is the author's 
own statement that the dramatis persona included 
Yorick, La Fleur, and Nannette, and that "the 
piece pleased and was pleasing." 32 No doubt 
sentimentality was not the least conspicuous ele- 
ment. / 

"Andre" was not a stage success. No wonder, 
since its hero was a British spy. Perhaps Dun- 
lap saw the paradox and felt that the same episode 
presented from the American standpoint would 
have a greater claim to popularity. At any rate, 
in 1803 "The Glory of Columbia— Her Yeo- 
manry !" again dramatized the Arnold- Andre con- 
spiracy, but now the hero was the American 
common people, and the appeal was made frankly 
to national feeling. Its close relation to the earlier 
play is apparent from the fact that nine of the 
nineteen scenes were taken from "Andre" with 
little or no alteration. 

Act I. Benedict Arnold is meditating treason. 
His servant, David Williams, suspecting him of 
disloyalty, leaves him. Scene III abruptly and ir- 
relevantly introduces Mrs. Bland and her children. 
In Scene IV Arnold and Andre meet and complete 
the plot. In the final scene Williams and his 
sister, Sally, are set upon by three English soldiers, 
but the unarmed Americans are more than a match 
for them. 

Act II. Andre is captured by Paulding, Van 

32 "American Theatre," pp. 259-60. 



i7 2 H&illiam SDunlat* 

Vert, and Williams 33 He attempts to buy his 
escape with the offer of great wealth, but the yeo- 
men are bribe-proof. The remainder of the act is 
taken up with the praise of Washington and other 
patriots, and with Sally's attempt to disguise her- 
self as a soldier. 

Act III. Capt. Bland intercedes with Wash- 
ington for the life of the spy. The unfortunate 
cockade episode is omitted. This act is composed 
entirely of scenes from different parts of "Andre." 

Act IV is made up of the escapades of an Irish- 
man who deserts the British, and of the Honora 
incidents. 

Act V. Washington exhorts the soldiers to 
make one final effort and all is won. Scene II 
represents the battle of Yorktown. After much 
cannonading the Americans gain the victory. All 
join in a hymn in praise of God and Washington. 
"A transparency descends, and an eagle is seen 
suspending a crown of laurel over the head of the 
commander-in-chief, with this motto — 'Immortal- 
ity to Washington.' " 

"The Glory of Columbia" is one of Dunlap's 
poorest plays. The better parts were taken from 
"Andre" and arranged haphazard. The new ma- 
terial was constructed hastily and with the sole 
idea of capturing an ebullient Fourth of July 
audience. The Irish humor is painful and has no 

33 It appears that when this play was given at the South 
Street Theatre in Philadelphia on July 4, 1807, a drop- 
scene, painted by Andre during his Revolutionary con- 
nection with the Philadelphia theatre, was used as back- 
ground for this episode. See "Andre," Publications of 
the Dunlap Society, introduction, pp. xiv, xv. 



Clje 4MgmaI papg 1 73 

connection with anything else in the piece. The 
whole composition is a disjointed, operatic hodge- 
podge, sugar-coated with copious quantities of 
patriotism. That the American public of the time 
was uncritical is indicated by the fact that "The 
Glory of Columbia" was repeated over and over 
again, while the greatly superior "Andre" disap- 
peared from the stage after three performances. 
When the subject was America, the playgoers de- 
manded not art, but the screaming of the eagle. 
In this connection it is interesting to note the 
success of Burk's atrocious "Bunker Hill ; or, The 
Death of Gen. Warren" (1797). 

"Bonaparte in England" (1803) was a timely 
farce based on the following newspaper account 
of a contemporary event: 

"The man apprehended at Portsmouth, under 
suspicion of being Jerome Bonaparte, is dis- 
charged. He had much the looks of an Italian 
Jew ( ! !) which is said to be the case with Jerome. 
While under confinement he was treated with the 
greatest politeness, which he took full advantage 
of, ordered every thing to the best, and kicked one 
of the persons down stairs, who was appointed to 
attend him, for some slight disrespect. On being 
discharged, he desired the officers to tell their em- 
ployers that as they had insisted upon his being 
the first consul's brother, he had lived up to the 
character !" 34 

34 "New York Evening Post/' December 20, 1803, re- 
printed this notice from a London paper. 



1 74 JMiiam 2Dunlaj> 

Dunlap made his hero a German Jew broker, 
named Shadrach, who, being shipwrecked on the 
coast of England, was seized as the brother of 
Napoleon. The broker tried to do justice to the 
honor, and by his lordly air gained the homage 
of a certain Irish officer, who confused him with 
Napoleon himself. 35 The critics pronounced it a 
laughable farce. Undoubtedly there are possibili- 
ties for comedy in the idea, and it is to be re- 
gretted that the play was not published. 

Concerning "The Proverb; or, Conceit Can 
Cure, Conceit Can Kill" (1804), we know only 
the little that Dunlap transcribed from a news- 
paper notice: 

"The plot contains considerable novelty of in- 
cident. It exhibits a picture of mountebank 
quackery, common in Europe, though little known 
in this country. The quack, with his attendant 
apparatus of stage and Jack Pudding, is intro- 
duced. The plot turns on the manoeuvres of a 
couple of gentlemen who assume the above dis- 
guises; the object of one being to regain his wife; 
the other to obtain the hand of a mistress." 36 

Dunlap's love of country expressed itself both 
at the beginning and the end of the War of 1812. 
The final victory was dramatized in "The Battle 
of New Orleans." The commencement of hostili- 
ties called forth the musical interlude of "Yankee 

35 See "American Theatre," p. 322. 

36 Ibid., p. 323. 



€fje Original $lap£ 1 7 5 

Chronology ; or, Huzza for the Constitution I" The 
preface, dated November 28, 1812, reads: 

"The song- of Yankee Chronology was written 
for the fourth of July last, excepting the last verse. 
Upon the arrival of the news of the victory ob- 
tained by captain Isaac Hull of the Constitution, 
over the english frigate the Guerriere, mr. Cooper 
called upon the writer and requested an additional 
verse, and an introductory interlude. My wishes 
were too much in unison with his to allow of hesi- 
tation. On the anniversary of the evacuation of 
this place, another verse was requested and given ; 
and the writer would be happy to evince his grati- 
tude to every defender of his country's rights, by 
adding for each a tribute of applause, till his song 
outdid chevy-chase in the number of verses." 

The prose introduction took the form of a street 
scene in New York. Ben Bundle, who fought on 
the Constitution, returns home and vigorously de- 
scribes the battle to his father and one O'Blunder. 
He then favors them with a song, "Yankee Chro- 
nology." This song, as originally written, con- 
tained nine stanzas of ten lines each, recounting 
Revolutionary events from Lexington to York- 
town, and urging the United States to conquer the 
same "haughty nation" again. After the victory 
of the Constitution on August 19, a tenth stanza 
was added, and a final one was annexed on No- 
vember 25, commemorating the evacuation of New 
York. As might be expected, this interlude con- 



176 IBilliam SDunla^p 

tains a great deal of patriotism and very little art. 
Its popularity is a further commentary on the 
public taste. 

Dunlap's last play, "A Trip to Niagara; or, 
Travellers in America" (1828), was, as he stated 
in the preface, no more than a farce intended as 
a running accompaniment to the scenery. The 
author confessed to using any material that might 
amuse the audience. 

Act I. Amelia Wentworth and her brother 
from England are stopping in New York during 
a tour of the United States. She is enthusiastic, 
he is disgusted, with everything American. Their 
cousin, John Bull, in love with Amelia, suddenly 
appears. To her he proposes the cure of Went- 
worth, suggesting herself as the reward. The 
three plan a trip up the Hudson and across to 
Niagara. As the first step in the curative pro- 
cess, Bull assumes the disguise and accent of a 
Frenchman. The second scene represents a boat- 
landing. The porters of the various boats are 
vociferously striving to decoy passengers into 
their respective vessels. Bull now appears as Jon- 
athan and annoys Wentworth. 

Act II presents the Diorama, showing eighteen 
views along the Hudson. The passengers land at 
Catskill. Wentworth protests that he hardly saw 
the scenery, having been exasperated all the way 
by a Yankee and a Frenchman. An Irishman, 
Dennis Doherty, furnishes some diversion in this 
act. 



Cfje Original $kpg 1 7 7 

Act III opens with a mountain sunrise. Went- 
worth's enjoyment of nature is again rudely jarred 
by the ubiquitous Frenchman. Enter Leather- 
stocking, who recounts some adventures from 
"The Pioneers." The party goes to Albany and 
thence to Buffalo. Jonathan suddenly changes his 
tactics, and by vilifying the Yankees and every- 
thing connected therewith, so arouses Went- 
worttis contradictory spirit that he begins defend- 
ing the country. Thereupon Bull reveals himself, 
and gains the necessary consent to his match with 
Amelia. The final scene is at Niagara Falls, where 
Wentworth admits that America is a great and 
glorious land. 

So "A Trip to Niagara" is merely a series of 
disconnected and puerile scenes and irrelevant 
characters. No doubt a certain amount of low 
comedy could be extracted from it, for the humor 
is frequent and boisterous ; but unless the scenery 
was strikingly excellent the audience with reason 
might have demanded its money back. Appar- 
ently, however, the uncritical playgoers were satis- 
fied, inasmuch as this farce was given at least 
twenty-four performances, a run equaled only by 
"The Glory of Columbia." 

Not the least interesting feature of "A Trip to 
Niagara" is the dialect characters. Dunlap here 
made use of the four most common types to be 
found in early American plays: the negro, the 
Frenchman, the Yankee, and the Irishman. Per- 
haps because of his humble social position, the 
negro was not exploited at this time as often as 



1 78 UMliam SDunlap 

one might expect. Job Jerry son of the present 
play is the only extant example of his use by Dun- 
lap. This dusky gentleman, it should be noted, 
has somehow lost the dialect which distinguished 
his forerunners, and under the influence of north- 
ern liberty he speaks like a lord of the land. 

The Frenchman with broken English was 
pressed into service quite as often as the negro, 
and generally he was treated with scant respect. 
Either he was made the butt of a joke or he was 
represented as a worthless character. Possibly 
this was a reflection of the strained relations which 
existed between the United States and France 
from about 1793 until the War of 1812. In "A 
Trip to Niagara" the Gallic element is merely a 
disguise and reveals no animosity, but in trans- 
lating "The Wild Goose Chace" (1800), Dunlap 
arbitrarily turned the mistreated hair-dresser into 
a Frenchman. 37 

That Tyler's Jonathan was a real contribution 
to early American drama is attested by the number 
of imitations. I have met a dozen Yankees, in- 
cluding the one in Dunlap's first play, by 1828, and 
no doubt there were others. Though the Jonathan 
of "A Trip to Niagara" is a disguise figure, yet 
he possesses many qualities of the original, — 
noticeably shrewdness and humor. He even per- 
petrates the famous Yankee joke of nutmegs made 
from pine boards. 

The favorite dialect personage was the Irish- 
man. I have counted twenty-two plays with Irish 

37 See post, p. 218. 



Clje Original $lap£ 1 79 

characters by 1828. Probably his popularity in 
the United States was a result of his popularity on 
the English stage. Dunlap, who came of Irish 
stock, was especially fond of the race. Not less 
than seven of his pieces contain Hibernians: 
"Darby's Return/' "The Glory of Columbia," 
"Bonaparte in England," "Lewis of Monte Blanco ; 
or, The Transplanted Irishman," "The Wife of 
Two Husbands," "Yankee Chronology," and "A 
Trip to Niagara." These Irishmen of his are a 
particularly irresponsible tribe, and their speech is 
as replete with bulls and brogue as a true son of 
Erin's should be. 

In the appendix to his "History of the American 
Theatre" Dunlap gave himself credit for two plays 
to which he was not entitled: "Blue Beard" and 
"The Africans." "Blue Beard," the work of 
George Colman the Younger, after a few seasons 
at Drury Lane appeared on the New York stage 
in 1802, and was often repeated for several 
years. 38 It was printed at New York in 1803, re- 
printed in 1806, and again in 181 1. The title-page 
bears this clause: "As altered for the New- York 
Theatre: With additional songs, By Wm. Dun- 
lap, Esq." A comparison of the New York edition 
with the London edition of 1798 shows that Dun- 
lap divided the drama into three instead of the 
original two acts, and rearranged the order of 
episodes somewhat; but his actual contribution 
amounted to one song in Act I, Scene I. 

38 "New York Evening Post," March 8, 1802, and fol- 
lowing issues. 



1 80 f©illiam SPunlap 

The second misappropriated play was also the 
work of Colman. "The Africans ; or, War, Love, 
and Duty" was first presented at the Haymarket in 
1808. Its New York premiere took place on Jan- 
uary 2, 1810. 39 It was printed anonymously at 
Philadelphia in 181 1. It is impossible to say 
whether Dunlap had anything to do with this ver- 
sion or not, but it is probable that during his 
second connection with the theatre he treated "The 
Africans" much as he had before treated "Blue 
Beard." That he wrote an original play of this 
name is very unlikely, because the "American 
Theatre" makes no mention of such a title, aside 
from a direct reference to Column's drama in this 
sentence : "January 2d, 1810, 'The Africans' had a 
run." 40 

"Rinaldo Rinaldini" is a name which Dunlap 
included in his bibliography, and consequently an 
anonymous "Rinaldo Rinaldini," "by an American 
and a citizen of New- York," printed in 1810, has 
been generally ascribed to him. Frederick H. 
Wilkens, however, has expressed a doubt as to the 
accuracy of this attribution. 41 He unquestionably 
has grounds for his suspicion. Poor as some of 
Dunlap's work was, he never descended to the 
formless, puerile impotence of this so-called 
tragedy. He was always capable of writing pass- 
able blank verse, whereas this affair is composed 

39 "Evening Post" of that date. A criticism in the issue 
of January 5 definitely called it Colman's play. 

40 P- 357- 

41 "Americana Germanica," Vol. Ill, p. 135. 



€ije Original pap£ 1 8 1 

in a sort of vers lihre of from three to six feet. 
Moreover, the preface indicates that it came from 
the pen of a novice: 

"I am sensible of the disadvantage which I con- 
sequently labour under, from a confined education ; 
nor do I expect my style will be thought equal, in 
elegance or energy, to the productions of those 
who, fortunately, from their situation in life, have 
been instructed in the Classics. . . . 

"The reason [for the failure of the play to ap- 
pear on the stage] is very obvious; the Author 
not having an opportunity from the time of its 
being written, to the publication. The Play was 
written for the Stage, but never offered." 

Now in 1810 Dunlap was one of the managers of 
the theatre ; he therefore would have no reason to 
complain of lack of opportunity for presenting his 
play. It is said to have appeared on the boards of 
the Park Theatre sometime in 1810. 42 If this was 
the case the situation would seem to be that Dunlap 
revised the printed copy for the stage and pre- 
sented it. There are no grounds for believing that 
he wrote another "Rinaldo Rinaldini." 



For two titles in Dunlap's bibliography I have 
no data. "Forty and Twenty" and "Robespierre" 
were apparently neither acted nor printed, and I 

42 Wegelin, "Early American Plays," edition of 1905, 
P- 35- 



1 82 iMliam SDunlap 

am unable to say when they were written, or 
whether they were originals or translations. 43 



Ill 

I have termed the plays considered in this chap- 
ter "original/' but the word is to be understood 
only in a relative sense, as distinguishing them 
from the translations. The foregoing discussion 
has brought out the fact that in practically every 
instance Dunlap was indebted to some outside 
source for his central idea. Almost invariably he 
borrowed his essential elements from a novel, a 
historical event, or another play, as he always 
frankly admitted. To be sure, borrowing plots is 
a practice sanctioned by the most unimpeachable 
precedent, but the result is notable only when the 
borrowing is revitalized by the author's person- 
ality. Such an achievement requires creative 
power, and creative power was what Dunlap 
lacked. His mind could not evolve an original 
conception. Only when the idea came to him 
ready-made, could he produce a drama, and even 
then his accomplishment was frequently but little 
more than a change of form. His equipment con- 
sisted chiefly of a knowledge of stagecraft and a 

43 Mr. Wegelin, "Early American Plays," Publications 
of the Dunlap Society, second series, No. 10, 1900, p. 38, 
has placed "It Is a Lie !" among Dunlap's unpublished 
dramas, which, he says, was acted at the New Bowery 
Theatre on August 20, 1828. A farce called "Is It a Lie ?" 
was given there at that time, but I find no reason for 
associating it with Dunlap. 



€tje Original papg i S3 

certain facility of composition, equipment which 
fitted him to be a dramatic remodeler rather than a 
creator. 

Of Dunlap's quasi-original plays, eleven were 
printed as they came from his pen, and one as 
revised by another hand. These twelve pieces may 
be taken as favorably representative of his work, 
since he listed all but "Yankee Chronology" and 
"A Trip to Niagara" in the prospectus of his ten- 
volume edition. From first to last he showed a 
peculiar lack of improvement. Perhaps his best 
dramas are his second and fourth— "The Father" 
and "Leicester." Certainly his last is one of his 
poorest. His career as a writer for the stage may 
be divided into two periods. The first, from 1787 
to the end of 1799, was a period of fairly con- 
tinuous work. The second, from 1800 to 1828, 
was a period of occasional composition which pro- 
duced only about the same number of dramas as 
the first period of less than half its length. More- 
over, in the first period he did almost all his better 
work, at least so far as we know it. The cause of 
this situation is not far to seek. Before his the- 
atrical troubles thickened around him, Dunlap was 
a man of comfortable means and sufficient leisure 
for his hobbies. In the fall of 1798 the sole di- 
rectorship of the theatre devolved on him. From 
then on, his time and finances were taxed to the 
utmost. The harassed man was now compelled 
to exercise his pen in manufacturing such things 
as would attract the largest crowds. Translation 
was the solution he hit upon, as did Richard 



1 84 iMiiam SDunlap 

Brinsley Sheridan in a similar predicament. By 
adapting a popular writer of France or Germany, 
he could quickly and inexpensively obtain a play 
which would be sure to draw vastly better than his 
most careful original dramas. The preparation of 
several foreign novelties each year consumed 
nearly all the little leisure allowed him by his posi- 
tion, and when the opportunity to do independent 
work did offer itself, he hastily knocked together 
something like "The Glory of Columbia," that 
would be likely to fill the house. When the 
managerial enterprise came to a disastrous close, 
the grim struggle with poverty began, to end only 
with death. Play-writing then could hardly be 
thought of, because of all professions it was the 
most precarious during this time of contempt for 
native literature. If Dunlap's products of the 
second period were inferior to those of the first, it 
was not from any loss of the ability displayed in 
his earlier years. "Andre" and "The Italian Father" 
show as much skill as any of his plays, because 
somehow the author still found time to work 
deliberately. Under such circumstances he was 
capable of constructing a theatrically effective 
drama, for he understood the mechanics of his 
craft. Professor Matthews truly said: "That 
Dunlap was not a poet, in any strict acceptation of 
the word, needs no discussion ; he was a competent 
playwright, and he knew how to make a drama 
in accordance with the tenets of his time." 44 

44 "Andre," Publications of the Dunlap Society, intro- 
duction, p. xiii. 



€lje (©riginai $Iap£ 1 8 5 

Therefore there is every reason to believe that he 
would have achieved more worthy results in his 
second period had he been able to devote all his 
faculties to the task. 

That he was accorded a high place by his con- 
temporaries, may be seen from the following quo- 
tations. The "London Magazine" in 1826 pub- 
lished a letter from Philadelphia on "American 
Dramatists," which contained this sentence: "The 
name of William Dunlap stands at the head of the 
list of American dramatists: his muse has been 
prolific, having produced forty-five pieces of this 
nature, many of which indicate respectable dra- 
matic talent." 45 According to the "American 
Quarterly Review" of 1827, "The earliest dramatic 
writer of New- York, and we think the best, was 
William Dunlap." 46 "The New York Mirror" in 
1833 said: 

1 

"As a dramatist, Mr. Dunlap has never received 
his due praise. If we consider the number of his 
works, he will be found, we believe, to have been 
by far the most prolific writer for the American 
stage. If he be judged by the criterion of success, 
it will be discovered that as large a proportion of 
his pieces keep possession of the boards, as of the 
average of dramatic writers, who are numbered 
among the permanent classics of the theatre. His 
numerous pieces were almost invariably performed 
with applause; and, free as they are from false 

45 New series, Vol. VI, pp. 466 ff. 
*e Vol. I, p. 350. 



1 86 !©iIJiam SDunlap 

taste and extravagance, show the power of fixing 
attention and exciting interest by legitimate means 
— of touching the true springs of mirth and pity 
and terror." The diction of his blank verse "is 
natural and spirited, and sometimes rises into 
beauty." In all his work "he has been careful to 
keep in view the true and nobler uses of the drama, 
and to direct it to results favorable to virtue." 47 

A comparison of the plays of Dunlap's first 
period with those of other American writers prior 
to 1800 indicates very clearly that he was the only 
playwright deserving the name whom this country 
had as yet produced. Godfrey had written a pass- 
able play, but only one. Brackenridge's rhetorical 
compositions were not intended to be acted. Mrs. 
Warren's pieces, consisting of several political 
pamphlets in dramatic form and two inferior 
tragedies, never appeared in the theatre. Tyler 
could boast of but three plays. Mrs. Rowson was 
a novelist who occasionally turned to drama. Burk 
was an editor and historian who brought out four 
ranting plays. Our author gave to the theatre 
during this period an average of rather more than 
one drama a year, the worst equal to the average 
of his predecessors, and the best considerably 
better than anything yet written. Dunlap, then, 
was the first American to lay claim to the title of 
professional dramatist by writing a succession of 
moderately good plays that were actually staged. 
His mild superiority was the result of several 
qualities. He had a sense of humor. He could 

^ Vol. X, p. 266. 



€f>e (Original JMapg 1 8 7 

write smoother prose and more literary blank verse 
than his rivals. And, better still, he knew how to 
build a play to secure continuous interest and 
suspense. 

Between 1800 and 1828, when Dunlap finally 
ceased writing for the theatre, a few dramatists 
came to the front, who, though producing a smaller 
quantity than he did, were more highly endowed. 
Among these may be mentioned James Nelson 
Barker, John Howard Payne, and Samuel Wood- 
worth. But if they surpassed their older con- 
temporary, it was in 'part owing to the fact that he 
had gone before and blazed the trail. For though 
Dunlap was an imitator of foreign tendencies, yet 
in this very imitation he proved to be an innovator 
and pioneer in the history of American drama. It 
would be futile to attempt to point out any specific 
influence of his on his immediate followers, be- 
cause it is impossible to separate his influence from 
that of the general type he was copying; yet it 
cannot be doubted that his work helped attract 
other writers to the forms with which he dealt. 

His first acted play was a sentimental comedy, a 
species which had long been very prominent in 
England. But "The Father" was only the second 
of the kind to be composed in this country, Tyler's 
"Contrast" having preceded it by a year or two. 
Subsequently Dunlap staged three other pieces of 
sentimentalism, "Sterne's Maria," "The Natural 
Daughter," 48 and "The Italian Father." It is safe 

48 This play was not printed, but the title, deriving 
from Cumberland's "Natural Son," indicates sentimental 
content. 



1 88 HMttiam SDunlap 

to assume that these added their weight to the in- 
fluence of the English representatives to call into 
being the large body of sentimental drama, which 
soon began appearing here. 49 

An important division of Dunlap's writing was 
the patriotic play. In this field he was not a 
pioneer, but he was the most generous contributor. 
Throughout his career this staunch patriot em- 
ployed his pen in praise of his native land. At the 
outset he wrote "Darby's Return," the purpose of 
which was to glorify America. Then came 
"Andre," "The Soldier of '76," "The Temple of 
Independence," "The Glory of Columbia," "Yan- 
kee Chronology," "The Battle of New Orleans," 
and "A Trip to Niagara." Perhaps he helped 

49 I have found the following sentimental dramas, which 
were written in the United States between Dunlap's first 
acted play and his last (1789-1828). This and the lists 
below are not exhaustive, but they show the tendencies 
during the years of Dunlap's dramatic authorship. The 
Yorker's Stratagem" (1792), J. Robinson; "Slaves in 
Algiers" (1794), Susannah Rowson; "The Triumphs of 
Love" (1795), J. Murdock; "The Man of the Times" 
(1797), Beete; "Reparation" (1800), T. P. Lathy; "The 
Hypocrite Unmasked" (1801), W. Winstanley; "He 
Stoops to Conquer" (1804), John Minshull; "Julia" 
(1806), J. H. Payne; "Tears and Smiles" (1807), J. N. 
Barker; "Jonathan Postfree" (1807), L. Beach; "The 
Trust" (1808) and "The Fox Chase" (1808), Charles 
Breck; "The School for Prodigals" (1809), "Fashionable 
Follies" (1809), and "The Wounded Hussar" (1809), 
Joseph Hutton; "Love and Friendship" (1809), A. B. 
Lindsley; "The Child of Feeling" (1809), George Wat- 
terson; "The Clergyman's Daughter" (1810) and "The 
Poor Lodger" (1811), W. C. White; "The Yankey in 
England" (1815), David Humphreys; "Clari" (1823), 
J. H. Payne. 



€l>e Original $Iapg 1 89 

popularize this type, for national affairs became 
one of the commonest themes in our early drama. 50 
In the history of ballad-opera Dunlap occupies 
a considerable place. Several operas had been 
written in this country before he attempted the 
form, but "Darby's Return" was the first to reach 
the stage. It was followed by "The Archers," 
"Sterne's Maria," "The Wild Goose Chace" (altered 
into an opera from Kotzebue), "The Knight of 
Guadalquiver," and "The Glory of Columbia." No 
doubt it was partly as a result of these that plays 
interspersed with songs grew to be very numerous 
at the end of the eighteenth century and the be- 
ginning of the nineteenth. 51 

50 Partial list of patriotic dramas during Dunlap's pe- 
riod: "Slaves in Algiers" (1794), Susannah Rowson; 
"The Death of Major Andre" (c. 1795), Mrs. Marriott; 
"Bunker Hill" (1797) and "The Death of Montgomery" 
(1797), John Burk; "West Point Preserved" (1797), 
Brown; "A New World Planted" (1802), Joseph Cros- 
well ; "The Battle of Eutaw Springs and Evacuation of 
Charlestown" (1807), William Ioor; "The Indian Prin- 
cess" (1808), J. N. Barker; "The Battle of New Orleans" 
(1816), C. E. Grice; "Triumph of Liberty" (1819), J. B. 
White; "She Would be a Soldier" (1819) and "Marion" 
(1821), M. M. Noah; "The Spy" (1822), C. P. Clinch; 
"A Tale of Lexington" (1823), S. B. H. Judah; "The 
Widow's Son" (1825), Samuel Woodworth; "Indian 
Prophecy" (1828), G. W. P. Custis. 

51 Partial list of musical plays during Dunlap's period : 
"The Reconciliation" (1790), Peter Markoe; "Tammany" 
(1794), Ann Hatton; "Slaves in Algiers" (1794), Susan- 
nah Rowson; "Edwin and Angelina" (1796), E. H. 
Smith; "Rural Felicity" (1801) and "The Sprightly 
Widow" (1803), John Minshull; "Independance" (1805), 
William Ioor; "Jonathan Postfree" (1807), L. Beach; 
"Tears and Smiles" (1807) and "The Indian Princess" 
(1808), J. N. Barker; "The Wounded Hussar" (1809), 



190 i©tfliam SDunlap 

In employing the robber motif Dunlap had only- 
one predecessor, E. H. Smith, author of "Edwin 
and Angelina." "The Knight's Adventure," re- 
vised by Hodgkinson, probably exerted some in- 
fluence in calling forth the succeeding group of 
robber dramas. 52 

One of Dunlap's distinct novelties was the 
Gothic drama, which appeared full-grown in 
"Fontainville Abbey," "The Knight's Adventure," 
and "Ribbemont." The type was soon seized upon 
by other Americans and frequently used. 53 

Closely allied to the Gothic drama was his most 
important innovation, the romantic tragedy and 
tragi-comedy. I have already shown that the pre- 

Joseph Hutton; "The Mountain Torrent" (1820) and 
"The Rose of Arragon" (1822), S. B. H. Judah; "Pad- 
dv's Trip to America" (1822), Charles Talbot; "The 
Deed of Gift" (1822), Samuel Woodworth; "Clari" 
(1823), J. H. Pavne; "The Saw Mill" (1824), Micah 
Hawkins; "The Forest Rose" (1825) and "The Widow's 
Son" (1825), Samuel Woodworth. 

52 Partial list of robber plays: "Rudolph" (1799?), J. 
D. Turnbull; "The Mysteries of the Castle" (1807), J. B. 
White; "Rinaldo Rinaldini" (1810), anonymous ; "The 
Rescue" (1813), Rinaldo D'Elville; "Otho" (1819), John 
Neal; "The Forest of Rosenwald" (1821), J. Stokes. 

53 Partial list of Gothic plays : "Female Patriotism" 
(1798), John Burk; "Edwy and Elgiva" (1801), C. J. 
Ingersoll; "Bethlem Gabor" (1807), J. Burk; "The Mys- 
teries of the Castle" (1807), J. B. White; "The Wood 
Daemon" (1808), J. D. Turnbull; "The Orphan of 
Prague" (1808), Joseph Hutton; "Rinaldo Rinaldini" 
(1810), anonymous; "Marmion" (1812), J. N. Barker; 
"Otho" (1819), John Neal; "The Mountain Torrent" 
(1820), S. B. H. Judah; "The Forest of Rosenwald" 
(1821), J. Stokes; "The Forgers" (1825), J. B. White; 
"Hadad" (1825), J. A. Hillhouse. 



€l)e #rigmai papg 1 9 1 

vailing kind of serious play in America before 1790 
was the eighteenth century form of tragedy. 
"Leicester" was the first protest against this 
tendency, and it was backed up by four roman- 
tic tragi-comedies : "Fontainville Abbey," "The 
Knight's Adventure," "The Archers," and "Rib- 
bemont." These must have had some influence, 
inasmuch as the serious plays after 1795 as a rule 
discarded the conventional formula. 54 

From this analysis of his original compositions, 
Dunlap's place in the history of American drama 
is apparent. He invented no new types and con- 
ceived no new ideas, but he was a pioneer in em- 
ploying several types and ideas as yet almost, or 
wholly, untried in this country. His important 
work was done in the last decade of the eighteenth 
century, a period of great change in our drama. 
The plays written in the United States between 
1795 and 1830 represent a very different classifi- 
cation from those of the preceding thirty-five 



54 In a list of romantic dramas during the period under 
consideration, all the above robber and Gothic plays 
should be included, as well as the following titles : "Slaves 
in Algiers" (1794), Susannah Rowson; "The Indian 
Princess" (1808), J. N. Barker; "The Fortress of Sor- 
rento" (1808) and "The Wandering Boys" (1812), M. M. 
Noah; "Demetria" (1813), J. A. Hillhouse; "She Would 
be a Soldier" (1819), M. M. Noah; "Percy's Masque" 
(1820), J. A. Hillhouse; "The Rose of Arragon" (1822), 
S. B. H. Judah; "The Grecian Captive" (1822), M. M. 
Noah; "The Spy" (1822), C. P. Clinch; "Ali Pacha" 
(1823) and "The Galley Slaves" (1823), J. H. Payne; 
"Superstition" (1823), J. N. Barker; "Logan" (1823), 
Joseph Doddridge; "La Fayette" (1824) and "The Wid- 
ow's Son" (1825), Samuel Woodworth. 



192 J©iHiam SDunla p 

years, and this classification is that of Dunlap's 
productions. I do not mean to intimate that 
American dramatists consciously followed in his 
steps, but unquestionably he was the most con- 
spicuous leader at the end of the century, for in 
every case he was among the first to try the 
novelty which later became the recognized con- 
vention. 

But, after all, the most memorable thing about 
our dramatist is not that he wrote good plays or 
bad plays, important plays or negligible plays, but 
that he wrote plays at all. He had a pleasant 
and remunerative business; and certainly the ex- 
perience of his forerunners was not such as to 
tempt a young man from the selling of china to 
the writing of dramas. His motives were love of 
the art and a desire to be known as a playwright. 
He obeyed the urge of the author's instinct at a 
time when authorship was not encouraged. He 
rejoiced in the opportunity to give his countrymen 
the benefit of his talent. And in recounting 
William Dunlap's claims to an honorable re- 
membrance, it should not be forgotten that com- 
mercialism had no part in the making of the 
Father of American Drama. 



CHAPTER IV 
The Dramatic Translations 

THE international copyright law was a product 
of the mid-nineteenth century. The first at- 
tempt to protect an author outside the limits of his 
country was made in 1837 by Prussia, but a com- 
plete system of international protection was not 
evolved until much later. 1 In the time of Dunlap's 
struggle for theatrical existence, a piece of foreign 
literature was the legitimate prey of any man who 
chose to appropriate it. Literary piracy directed 
against another nation was a respectable and some- 
times a lucrative occupation. 

This lax state of affairs proved a boon to the 
manager of the New York theatre. He was there- 
by enabled to provide his stage not only with the 
English favorites without cost, but also with 
numerous French and German novelties simply by 
the expenditure of the time necessary for transla- 
tion. Dunlap was well aware that a play bearing 
the European trade-mark was much more certain 
of a cordial reception than a home product. Hence 
during the greater part of his managership he em- 
ployed himself extensively in translating and pre- 
senting foreign successes. Here he found a task 
for which he was peculiarly fitted. Though en- 
dowed with but little originality, he yet knew stage 

1 R. R. Bowker, "Copyright, Its History and Its Law," 
Boston, 1912, p. 311. 

193 



194 IBffliam SDunlap 

technique thoroughly, and with a ready com- 
mand of English and some linguistic ability, he 
was well equipped for dramatic remodeling. 
Translating for the theatre had become a frequent 
practice in England, and it was already slightly 
known in this country, but Dunlap was the earliest 
American to make a business of it. 



I 

Our author's activities as an adapter were con- 
fined chiefly to German drama, but he also drew 
upon France for contributions, and indeed his first 
translation was made from the French. Theatre- 
goers of the United States had formed a passing 
acquaintance with the dramatic literature of 
France through occasional British renderings, such 
as Philips's "Distressed Mother," Hill's "Zara," 
and Dibdin's "Deserter," as well as a few Amer- 
ican adaptations, especially Henry's "School for 
Soldiers" and Humphreys's "Widow of Malabar." 
Dunlap, however, gave French drama a much 
more conspicuous place on our stage than it had 
formerly possessed. 

In 1797 the New York manager submitted his 
first effort at translation to the judgment of his 
patrons. When "Tell Truth and Shame the 
Devil" issued from the press it was accompanied 
with this note: "Those who are curious to know 
how far this comedy is original, or how far bor- 
rowed, will be satisfied by consulting a French 



€l)e SDramatic €rangIation£ 1 9 5 

dramatic proverb, of one act, called Jerome 
Pointu/' This piece by A. L. B. Robineau, who 
wrote under the pseudonym of "Beaunoir," was 
presented at Paris in 1781. Jerome Pointu is a 
licentious, avaricious, hypocritical lawyer, who dis- 
charges his free-and-easy clerk, Leandre, for 
moral irregularities. Leandre returns disguised 
and leads Jerome to disclose his passion for wine, 
women, and gaming. Over the dice-box the clerk 
wins all Jerome's possessions ; then revealing him- 
self, he offers to restore everything in exchange 
for the hand of his daughter. Though violently 
opposed to the match, the miserly lawyer is forced 
into the bargain. 

Dunlap robbed this clever little farce of most of 
its effect by over-moralizing it. "Tell Truth and 
Shame the Devil" opens with a scene not in the 
original, in which Semblance {Pointu renamed) is 
accused by his honest partner, Whitely (invented 
by Dunlap), of all manner of abomination; thus 
the interest of seeing the hypocrite's character 
gradually exposed is destroyed. Dunlap's incor- 
rigible honesty again led him astray at the end. 
The point of the French piece is entirely lost when 
Semblance refuses his consent to the engagement 
because of Tom's deception in the disguise. The 
American version closes with an original epilogue 
satirizing untruth by pretending to praise it. 

Aside from the changes which I have noted and 
the omission of the superfluous clerk, Blaise, the 
adapter followed the French outline carefully. But 
he never fell into the error of rendering literally; 



196 IMIiam SDunlap 

the play was written in colloquial and idiomatic 
English. 

In 1799, in the midst of his Kotzebuean labors, 
Dunlap again turned his attention to France. This 
time he employed a bourgeois tragedy of some 
prominence, "Le Deserteur" (c. 1770), by Louis 
Sebastien Mercier. It is one of the many lacry- 
mose plays which France produced after the in- 
vasion of sentimentalism during the first half of 
the eighteenth century. 2 "Le Deserteur" presents 
the sad history of a young man who, having de- 
serted his regiment because of ill-treatment, is ap- 
prehended on the eve of his marriage, and is ex- 
ecuted. The grief of the hero's newly found 
father adds poignancy to the tragedy. 3 

Dunlap prepared this play for his theatre as 
"The School for Soldiers," drawing heavily, it 
would seem, on "The School for Soldiers ; or, The 
Deserter," a version made in 1783 by John Henry 
of the old American Company. The later transla- 
tion was not published, but a comparison of the 
respective dramatis persona, as found in Ireland, 
shows that Dunlap employed Henry's revised 
names, 4 and one easily infers that the borrowing 
did not stop there. The New York manager, per- 
haps following his predecessor's lead, domesticated 

2 See F. Gaiffe, "Le Drame en France au XVIIIe 
Siecle," Paris, 1910. 

3 Mercier's "Le Deserteur" is not to be confused with 
Sedaine's musical drama of the same name, translated by 
Thomas Dibdin. 

4 "Records of the New York Stage," Vol. I, pp. 79, 188. 



€t)e 2Dramatk Cranglationg 197 

the plot by laying the action in the time of the 
American Revolution. 5 

A few months later Dunlap presented "The 
Robbery," his adaptation of Boutet de Monvel's 
"Clementine et Desormes." This sentimental 
drama, first performed at the Theatre Frangais in 
1780, had already been translated into Dutch, 
Italian, and Spanish. The American version was 
not printed, and I have been able to locate its 
original only through the cast of characters 
printed in the "Commercial Advertiser" of Decem- 
ber 27, 1799. Monvel's play involves a hero driven 
from home by his stepmother, a hopeless love 
affair with his employer's daughter, a charge of 
theft and a threat of execution, a chance meeting 
of the long separated son and father, a complete 
acquittal and a touching "bless you my children." 

Charles-Michel, Abbe de l'fipee, was one of the 
most prominent humanitarians of the eighteenth 
century. In 1755 he established, at his own ex- 
pense, a school for the deaf and dumb, and became 
the founder of the modern system of instructing 
deaf-mutes. In 1799 Jean Bouilly wrote a play, 
"L'Abbe de 1'fipee," wherein the philanthropist 
aids one of his pupils in regaining an estate of 
which he has been villainously deprived. Being 
sufficiently sentimental, the piece had a triumphant 
career in France, 6 and was much admired else- 

5 See "New York Gazette," February 23, 1801. 

6 Ernest Legouve, "Soixante Ans de Souvenirs," Paris, 
1887, Vol. I, p. 88. 



198 JMliam Duttiap 

where. Kotzebue translated it, shortly after it was 
written, as "Der Taubstumme; oder, Der Abbe 
de l'Epee." In February, 1801, Holcroft's version, 
"Deaf and Dumb ; or, The Orphan Protected," be- 
gan a successful run in London. 7 In the same 
year Benjamin Thompson published "Deaf and 
Dumb; or, The Orphan," a literal translation of 
Kotzebue's literal translation. Charles Smith, a 
New Yorker, in 1801 reprinted Thompson's ren- 
dering. 

In March, 1801, Dunlap staged his own adapta- 
tion of Bouilly's play, retaining the original title. 
It was not published, but we know that he went to 
the French, and not to the German of Kotzebue. 8 
A critique in the "New York Evening Post" of 
December 14 stated that Dunlap's piece varied 
considerably from its source, several new scenes 
being added, and certain episodes merely narrated 
in the French being actually represented. His 
alteration was pronounced an interesting, moral, 
and well-constructed drama. 

The next borrowing from France, and the most 
popular, was "The Voice of Nature," based on L. 
C. Caigniez's "Le Jugement de Salomon" (1802). 
The latter, founded on the biblical episode, locates 
the scene in Jerusalem. Leila, the mother of an 
illegitimate child of which she had been robbed 
some years before, chances to recognize her off- 
spring by means of birth-marks. She learns that 

7 Genest, Vol. VII, p. 501. 
s "American Theatre," p. 286. 



€l)e SDrattiatic €ranglatimtg 1 99 

it had been stolen by Tamira, whose husband 
threatened divorce unless an heir was born. Both 
women loudly claiming the child, the matter is 
brought before Solomon, who orders that the boy 
be bisected. Leila proves her maternity by re- 
linquishing her claim. Eliphal, the seducer of 
Leila, now makes amends in marriage. 

Translated by Boaden, this play was frequently 
presented in England in 1802. Perceiving the 
tone to be quite unoriental, Boaden adroitly trans- 
planted the events to Sicily, and to suit the new 
setting renamed most of the characters ; thus King 
Alphonso was substituted for Solomon, Alzira 
for Tamira, and Rinaldo for Eliphal. 

In February, 1803, Dunlap staged his version 
of Caigniez's drama, imitating Boaden in title, 
setting, and names. The American text, however, 
shows no indebtedness to the English. That this 
inferior play was a European success must be at- 
tributed partly to the peculiar appeal of its mother- 
and-child sentimentality. Dunlap realized that the 
same element would meet the hearty approval of 
his countrymen, and he took pains to stress it. 
He added an original epilogue, in which Alzaira 
declares that no woman could be so heartless as 
the one she has been impersonating, for the voice 
of nature speaks to all women alike, and they 
cannot but obey. What virtuous joy the translator 
must have experienced when the press styled his 
new piece one of the most affecting heart-appeals 
ever known ! 9 

9 "New York Evening Post," February 5, 1803. 



200 IMiiam SDunlajr 

"The Voice of Nature" is of interest as the first 
representative of French "melodrame" to make 
its appearance in the New York theatre. The 
"melodrame" was a distinct type of play which 
developed in France from sentimental and Gothic 
drama at the end of the eighteenth century. The 
species was constructed according to a pretty 
definite formula; it required as the essential ele- 
ments of the plot a heroine who is all virtue, a 
deep-dyed villain, a protector who rescues the 
lovely victim when her distress is at its height, and 
generally a humorous servant who also champions 
the cause of the oppressed. It was further dis- 
tinguished by the use of descriptive music; the 
entrances, the exits, the pathetic scenes, and the 
tense passages were accompanied by orchestral 
music in keeping with the character or event. 
Thus the plaintive flute was made to suggest the 
dolor of the persecuted heroine, while the bass- 
viol announced the villain. Joy, surprise, suspense, 
despair, and divers other emotions appropriate to 
the action were represented by the musical score. 
Still other ear-marks of "melodrame" were dances 
and pageants, relevantly or irrelevantly introduced ; 
pantomime to assist in presenting the most exciting 
and breathless episodes; and elaborate stage dec- 
orations and mechanical devices. 

The father of "melodrame" was Guilbert de 
Pixerecourt, whose "Victor ou l'Enfant de la 
Foret" was brought out in 1797. In his "Ccelina 
ou l'Enfant du Mystere," brought out in 1800, the 
form was seen in its completeness. The piece had 



€f)e 2Dramatic Cran^Iaticng 20 1 

a remarkable run, and was followed by dozens of 
similar plays from the same pen. Another pioneer 
was Caigniez. His "Jugement de Salomon," which 
adheres to the formula with omission of the 
humorous element, was performed three hundred 
times in 1802. Thus "melodrame" became the 
theatrical fashion in France, and remained so for 
years. 

The species, with all its adornments, was in- 
troduced to England in 1802 by Thomas Holcroft's 
"Tale of Mystery," a translation of "Ccelina." 
Soon the British stage was overrun with melo- 
dramas. Novels and plays were melodramatized, 
and legitimate drama was almost driven from the 
boards. 10 

Dunlap gave New York its first taste of the new 
type when he submitted "The Voice of Nature" in 
February, 1803. But in all probability the audi- 
ences did not realize that they were witnessing a 
novelty, for its presentation did not differ ma- 
terially from that to which they were accustomed. 11 
To be sure, the music was more in evidence, but 
otherwise Dunlap omitted much of the melodra- 
matic machinery, probably because he did not find 
it specified in the French text. New York first 
saw melodrama in its full glory when "A Tale 
of Mystery" was performed on March 16, 1803. 
It was advertised and reviewed as an innovation, 



10 See Paul Ginisty, "Le Melodrame," Paris ; A. H. 
Thorndike, "Tragedy," p. 334- 

11 It was published in 1803 as a "drama in three acts 
translated and altered from a French melodrame." 



202 IBtfiiam SDunlap 

and Dunlap referred to it as "the first play of the 
kind seen in the New World." 12 He was able to 
stage the piece with all the spectacular accompani- 
ments, because Holcroft, who had seen "melo- 
drame" in the Parisian theatres, added to his ver- 
sion all necessary directions, which were left out 
in the French editions. "A Tale of Mystery" met 
the approval of New York, and served to establish 
melodrama as one of the popular forms. 

In April, 1804, Dunlap brought out another 
French melodrama of his translating, Pixerecourt's 
"La Femme a Deux Maris." It was first acted at 
Paris in 1802, and was repeated hundreds of times 
all over France. 13 Briefly the plot is this : Eliza 
Werner, a supposed widow, is happily married to 
Count de Fersen. Her first husband, Isadore 
Fritz, a villain of the darkest hue, suddenly ap- 
pears, accuses her of faking the story of his death, 
and demands her property. Upon discovering the 
existence of a previous husband, the Count is con- 
vinced that he and Eliza must separate. He offers 
Fritz a large sum for the promise of non-inter- 
ference. Fritz, however, has designs on the whole 
estate. He plans an ambuscade for the Count, but 
Bataille, the humorous concierge, overhears, and 
so arranges it that the villain falls into his own 
trap. 

Two British versions preceded Dunlap's : Miss 
Elizabeth Gunning's unacted "Wife with Two 

12 "American Theatre," p. 314. 

13 Ginisty, p. 71. 



€£e 2Dtamatic Cran^lationg 203 

Husbands" (1803), a close translation; and James 
Cobb's free rendering of the same name, acted in 
1803. The American adaptation seems to have 
been constructed largely from its two English pre- 
cursors. In the main it is a paraphrase of Miss 
Gunning's text, and in places it copies her ver- 
batim. From Cobb were taken some of the altered 
names, and the idea of substituting an Irishman, 
Armagh, for the Sicilian, Bataille. Though of 
miscellaneous origin, Dunlap's "Wife of Two 
Husbands" is a fairly effective play which does not 
lack for intensity in the climaxes. In its presenta- 
tion, the conventions of melodrama apparently 
were but little observed, for it was not advertised 
or published as such, and aside from dances and 
songs the text gives no indication of the new mode 
of performance. 

During the time when sentimentalism was a 
fetish, French drama was infected even down to 
the opera-comique. Within this genus there was a 
rare species of the "purement tragique et lar- 
moyant," to which belonged "Nina ou la Folle par 
Amour" (1786), by Joseph Marsollier. 14 This 
lugubrious affair tells the story of a girl whose 
father breaks her engagement with Germieul in 
consideration of a wealthier suitor. In a duel 
between the two wooers, Germieul is severely 
wounded and left for dead. Nina goes mad. In 
due time Germieul recovers and returns to an 
equivocal bliss with the loving but deranged Nina. 

14 Gaiffe, p. 479- 



204 IBiHiam SDunlaj* 

The sentimentalism and unusual French vogue of 
this opera, which had also been translated in Eng- 
land in 1787, induced Dunlap to attempt a version. 
It was brought out unsuccessfully in December, 
1804, as "Nina," and was never published. 

Dunlap's last translation was made from a then 
famous French bourgeois tragedy, written in the 
style of a melodrama, "Trente Ans ou la Vie d'un 
Joueur" (1827), by Prosper Goubaux (pseudonym 
"Dinaux") and Victor Ducange. 15 This violently 
moral play, which shows the surviving influence of 
Moore's "Gamester," represents three periods of a 
gambler's life, after successive intervals of fifteen 
years each. It traces his gradual downfall until 
he becomes a pauper, a highwayman, and a 
murderer. There were two British translations, 
"The Hut of the Red Mountain ; or, Thirty Years 
of a Gamester's Life," and "The Gambler's Fate; 
or, A Lapse of Twenty Years," of which the latter 
began a successful run at the Park in November, 
1827. In February, 1828, Dunlap's "Thirty Years ; 
or, The Life of a Gamester," appeared at the 
Bowery Theatre. The American version was not 
published, but I have compared the manuscript at 
the Yale Library with the original, and have found 
it to be a close rendering with occasional cuttings. 

15 Legouve, "Souvenirs," Vol. II, p. 29, called it the most 
popular play of the period. 






€I)e 2Dramatic Cranglationg 205 



11 

Prior to Dunlap's labors as a translator, German 
drama was but scantily represented in the United 
States. Frederick H. Wilkens, in his monograph 
on the "Early Influence of German Literature in 
America," 16 mentions nothing before David Rit- 
tenhouse's unacted rendering of Lessing's "Miss 
Sara Sampson," published at Philadelphia in 1789. 
The only plays on our stage before Dunlap's 
adaptations were Lessing's "Minna von Barn- 
helm" and Schiller's "Die Rauber," both per- 
formed in 1795 from British translations. Four 
years later the New York manager had brought 
the drama of Germany to a high pitch of popular- 
ity, chiefly through the meretricious charms of 
Kotzebue. 

One of the most amazing phenomena of liter- 
ature was August Friedrich Ferdinand von Kotze- 
bue. To-day he is no more than a name. At the 
close of the eighteenth century he was the most 
famous man of letters in Europe, and his grip on 
immortality was commonly reckoned as sure as 
Shakespeare's. General attention was first at- 
tracted to him by his "Menschenhass und Reue" 
(1789), the success of which was overwhelming in 
Germany, and rendered him the public idol. With 
breath-taking rapidity followed some two hundred 

16 "Americana Germanica," Vol. Ill, p. in. 



206 KMliam SDunlaj* 

and fifteen plays before his death in 1819. 17 After 
about 1800 his vogue at home waned rapidly, only 
a handful of his dramas retaining a place in the 
theatres. The chief reasons for his meteoric rise 
are three: First, Kotzebue was extremely skilful 
in producing superficial effectiveness by bizarre 
and exciting situations and showy characters; 
while, except for Schiller, there was no other Ger- 
man playwright at this time capable of making a 
popular appeal. Second, by presenting the aristo- 
crat as vicious, the common man as the embodi- 
ment of virtue, he caught the favor of the growing 
spirit of democracy which had been fostered by 
the French Revolution. Third, he hit the taste of 
the time by constant use of sentimentality. 

In writing bourgeois dramas of sentiment, 
Kotzebue was following the fashion set for Ger- 
many by Lessing when, in 1755, under the in- 
fluence of Lillo and the French "comedie larmoy- 
ante," he wrote "Miss Sara Sampson." This 
"biirgerliche Tragoedie" met with large success, as 
did his sentimental comedy, "Minna von Barn- 
helm" (1767). Through the remainder of the 
century these two types prevailed. In 1784 Schil- 
ler's "Kabale und Liebe" reached the high-water 
mark of German bourgeois tragedy. About this 
time Iffiand was producing a prosperous series of 
moral and moving comedies of every-day life. 
Following these examples, Kotzebue proclaimed 
on every occasion the two shibboleths of his day, 

17 Charles Rabany, "Kotzebue : sa Vie et son Temps," 
Paris, 1893 ; see his bibliography. 



€t)e SDramatic €ran£latitm£ 207 

feeling and democracy, and captured his gen- 
eration. 

As the century ended England became as de- 
lirious with the Kotzebuean fever as Germany, 
and for much the same reasons. British drama 
was at a very low ebb; Lewis, Holcroft, Colman, 
and Dibdin were the best that England could claim, 
and these the German writer easily surpassed in 
the qualities that are necessary for immediate the- 
atrical success. Kotzebue's fame across the Chan- 
nel was first established by the unacted transla- 
tion of "Die Negersklaven" in 1796, which made 
a pronounced impression because of its appropri- 
ateness to the slave agitation. Its author's career 
on the English stage was inaugurated at Drury 
Lane in 1798 by Sheridan's translation of "Men- 
schenhass und Reue" under the title of "The 
Stranger." It was belauded by the majority of the 
papers and reviews. The "Times" declared: "Its 
beauties 'are not of an age, but of all times.' " It 
was given twenty-six performances the first 
season, and appeared regularly thereafter for 
many years. As a rival piece Covent Garden in 
the same year brought out "Lovers' Vows," an 
adaptation of "Das Kind der Liebe." It was given 
forty-two times this season, and continued in the 
London repertories until 1829. Sheridan again 
pressed Kotzebue into the service of his depleted 
finances in 1799 by presenting "Pizarro," based on 
"Die Spanier in Peru." During the first twelve 
months of its run it was given sixty-seven times, 
and for ten years it filled the theatre wherever and 



208 i©flliam SDunlap 

whenever played. It went to the twenty-sixth edi- 
tion in 1800. Numerous other Kotzebue dramas 
were brought forward during the last three years 
of the century, but after 1800 the German mania 
subsided, and only an occasional new piece was ac- 
corded a brief trial, while "The Stranger," "Lov- 
ers' Vows," and "Pizarro" alone retained a regular 
place in the British theatres. 18 

The following is a list of Kotzebue's plays which 
were translated in England, arranged approx- 
imately in the order of their introduction to the 
public. 19 

Translation first acted First published 

"Die Negersklaven" 1796 

"Die Indianer in England" by 1800 20 1796 

"Menschenhass und Reue" 1798 1798 

"Das Kind der Liebe" 1798 1798 

"Adelheid von Wulfingen" 1798 

"Der Graf von Burgund" 1799 1798 

"Graf Benyowski" 1811 1798 

"Die Versohnung" 1799 1799 

"Die Spanier in Peru" 1799 1799 

"Die Wittwe und das Reitpferd". 1799 1799 

"Der Opfertod" 1799 1799 

"Armut und Edelsinn" 1799 1799 

"Das Schreibepult" 1799 '. . 1799 

"Die Sonnenjungfrau" 1812 1799 

18 Walter Sellier, "Kotzebue in England," Leipzig, 1901. 

19 This table is compiled from the British Museum 
Catalogue, Genest, and Sellier. 

20 Genest mentions no performance of it, but Anne 
Plumptre's translation of Kotzebue's autobiography, Lon- 
don, 1800, p. 380, states that it was acted at Stamford. 



€l)c SDramatic Cranglationg 209 

Translation first acted First published 

"Die Edle Luge" 1799 

"Die Corsen" 1799 

"Falsche Scham" 1799 

"La Perouse" 1801 1799 

"Die Silberne Hochzeit" 1799 

"Die Verlaumder" 1799 

"Die Uble Laune" 1799 

"Joanna von Montfaucon" 1800 1800 

"Der Wildfang" 1800 1805 

"Der Taubstumme" 1801 1801 

"Der Weibliche Jacobiner-Klubb" 1801 

"Die Kreuzfahrer" 1806 

"Eduard in Schottland" 1808 1808 

"Blind Geladen" 1812 1812 

"Die Beiden Klingsberg" 1814 

"Der Rehbock" 1824 

"Die Hussiten vor Naumburg" 1830 

"Die Verwandtschaf ten" 1837 

"Die Organe des Gehirns" 1838 

"Der Wirrwarr" 1842 

A few specimens of the English adulation show- 
ered on Kotzebue may be of interest: 

"It is no feeble symptom of interior selfishness, 
not to relish the general flow of his sentiments; 
not to glow with sympathetic rapture, while this 
Rousseau of the drama delineates the sweet affec- 
tions and the noble sacrifices which abound among 
his heroes and heroines, and which are so well 
adapted to electrify an audience."— "Monthly Re- 
view; or, Literary Journal," Vol. XXIX, p. 102. 



210 JtSHliam SDunlap 

"The rest of the writers for the stage will do 
well to study the German poet; and we hope that 
their application may recall them from Blue Beards 
and Spectres to a true copy of human life." — 
"Monthly Review; or, Literary Journal," Vol. 
XXVI, p. 190. 

"There is, in his works, something exceedingly 
congenial to the cast of English character, and to 
the predominant tone of English sentiment. It is 
Shakespeare, without his quibbles, his negligences, 
his incongruities, his violations of the most indis- 
pensable dramatic probabilities. ... It is Shake- 
speare, still endowed with all that moral wisdom 
which renders his works the best school of civil 
sagacity, and makes the deep study of them almost 
a perfect substitute for real experience in the 
varied scenes of human life." — Preface to "Self- 
immolation," by Henry Neuman, 1799. 

But the "German Shakespeare's" vogue did not 
go unchallenged. With the appearance of "The 
Stranger" began the activities of an opposition 
party headed by the Tories, the anti-revolutionists. 
Kotzebue's disregard for accepted religion, morals, 
and social rank was violently castigated. Certain 
of his enemies thus vented their spleen : 

"Let us, for God's sake, look with a little more 
circumspection at the claims of these German 
philosophers, before we so readily admit the value 
of them; nor suffer the public taste to be vitiated 
thus, without making one single attempt to expose 



€lje 2Dramatic Cranglationg 2 1 1 

the absurdity of its seducer. My blood boils with 
indignation when I see my beloved Shakespeare, 
Otway, Rowe, and all those ornaments of my na- 
tive country, thrust aside, to make way for the 
filthy effusions of this German dunce ! 

"Forbid it Britons!— forbid it common sense!" 
— "Anti- Jacobin Review," Vol. Ill, p. 210. 

"We wish that it was unlawful to translate them 
[Kotzebue's plays], except into Coptic, and that 
they were to be preserved in that language only." 
-"British Critic," Vol. XV, p. 431. 

"When it is considered how large a quantity of 
Kotzebue we have been obliged to swallow, the 
reader cannot wonder at our shuddering when a 
fresh dose is offered to us. There is, alas ! no 
honey around the edges of the nauseating cup." 
—"Monthly Review; or, Literary Journal," Vol. 
XXXII, p. 326. 

With the Kotzebuean fad raging in Europe, 
William Dunlap was not slow to perceive that his 
best interests demanded its immediate importation 
to the United States. Accordingly, on December 
10, 1798, the New York theatre presented to a de- 
lighted audience that great London favorite (best 
of recommendations), "The Stranger." Already 
England had been blest with three translations of 
"Menschenhass und Reue," Papendick's, Schinck's, 
and Thompson's, in addition to Sheridan's altera- 
tion for the stage, a composite of the three. The 
New York manager seems not to have availed him- 
self of any of these. His German was rather 






212 iMiiam SDunlap 

meagre for purposes of translation, but "having 
got possession of a wretched publication in which 
the plot and part of the dialogue of Kotzebue's 
play were given, in language neither German nor 
English, he wrote a play founded on these mate- 
rials. . . . The author had adopted the names 
from the English play-bills, as well as the name 
by which Kotzebue's play was performed in Lon- 
don, and the public were at liberty to suppose that 
that which delighted them had been sanctioned by 
a London audience." 21 

The American "Stranger" was never published, 
but we may assume that it reproduced the original 
in outline at least. The story as told by Kotzebue 
is this : An anonymous misanthrope is living in 
seclusion. Near him dwells a woman, Eulalia 
(called Mrs. H alter in the English theatrical ver- 
sion), who passes her days in repentance for hav- 
ing deserted her husband years before. The 
Stranger and Eulalia chance to meet, and discover 
that they are husband and wife. After a touching 
renunciation, they are about to part forever, when 
their two small children appear and draw the for- 
giving pair into each other's arms. 

How far New York approved of this piece of 
sentimentality may be gathered from a critique in 
the "Commercial Advertiser" of December 17, 
1798 : "I believe it may be asserted that this Drama 
is without a parallel." The novelty of its incidents, 
their arrangement for alternate laughter and tears, 
and especially its high moral tone and emotional 

21 "American Theatre," p. 253. 



Clje SDramatic €ranglation£ 2 1 3 

truth, impressed the writer as unique. "If all plays 
were like this, and if all audiences were equally 
attentive and susceptible, the question as to the 
usefulness of the Theatres might easily be de- 
cided; since no man who witnessed this play can 
hesitate a moment to admit that he came away a 
better man than he went." The same journal for 
January 17, 1800, stated that the American trans- 
lation of "The Stranger" was held superior to 
Kotzebue's original,— high praise, indeed, for a 
native product. 

The public appetite, whetted by its first taste of 
the German dramatist, soon demanded additional 
morsels of the same savory variety. In the words 
of the "Commercial Advertiser" of March 7, 1799, 
"To see something more from the pen of Kotze- 
bue is now the general wish," a desire that was 
satisfied when Dunlap brought forward "Lovers' 
Vows," — likewise the second play on the London 
stage. 

The plot has to do with a baron who seduces a 
poor girl, and who in later years, being discovered 
and denounced by his son, is persuaded to marry 
the victim of his youthful folly. 

The English acting version of this drama was 
Mrs. Inchbald's "Lovers' Vows" (1798). In the 
same year Stephen Porter and Anne Plumptre 
both translated it. Dunlap stated that his render- 
ing was not printed, 22 but in 1814 an edition of 
"Lovers' Vows" was published with his name on 

22 "American Theatre," p. 261. 



214 J©iHiam SDunlajr 

the title-page, and there can be little doubt that it 
was Dunlap's work. This edition proves to be a 
copy of Plumptre's "Natural Son," with a little 
cutting and piecing and some renaming of the 
characters, but with no evidence of first-hand use 
of Kotzebue. The "Monthly Magazine, and Amer- 
ican Review" 23 reported that the American ver- 
sion was said to be Plumptre's translation fitted 
for a local audience by the director of the New 
York theatre. An extract quoted from the direc- 
tor's manuscript is identical with a passage in the 
edition of 1814, and differs in names of characters 
and other details from all other versions. We must 
conclude then that the New York edition of "Lov- 
ers' Vows" is Dunlap's, the publication of which 
he somehow failed to acknowledge in his stage 
history. 

He did well to work on the basis of Plumptre's 
rather than Inchbald's translation, since the former 
possesses considerably more attractiveness of char- 
acter and dialogue. By somewhat enlivening this 
literal rendering, he produced a play which justi- 
fied the above-mentioned "Monthly Magazine," 
edited by Charles Brockden Brown, in congratu- 
lating New York on the superiority of its acting 
version to that of London. The "Commercial Ad- 
vertiser" of March 12, in reviewing the play, said: 

"Last evening, with curiosity alive and expecta- 
tion of a renewal of that delight which the 
'Stranger' had so repeatedly pour'd into the hearts 
23 Vol. I, p. 96. 



€f>e SDramatic €ran£lationg 2 1 5 

of listening thousands, a crowded audience at- 
tended our Theatre to witness the first exhibition 
of 'Lovers' Vows/ and we will venture to say that 
never was so high raised curiosity so fully grati- 
fied. ... It is a just picture of natural circum- 
stances thrown together with exquisite skill for the 
purpose of painting passion and teaching virtue." 

Dunlap followed up these two achievements with 
"Count Benyowski," of which a translation by 
Render had already been printed in London. The 
American manuscript was not published, but it was 
a free rendering, judging from its author's state- 
ment that "the literal translations of Count Ben- 
yowski can give no idea of the drama as prepared 
for the New York stage." 24 The scene of Kotze- 
bue's play is laid in a Russian exile station whither 
Benyowski, an Austrian, has been banished. Un- 
der his leadership the exiles engage in a rebellion. 
The governor's daughter, with whom Benyowski, 
though married, has fallen in love, is about to 
accompany him in his flight, but her father en- 
treats her to remain, and the Austrian at last 
relinquishes her. This heroic drama did not attain 
the popularity of its two predecessors. 

The season's final offering in the way of adap- 
tation from the Teutonic dramatist was "Indians 
in England," the reception of which was commen- 
surate with its merits,— it was given but once, and 
Dunlap saw no reason for printing it. Wherefore 
24 "American Theatre," p. 261. 



216 iDfltiam SDunlap 

its relation to Alexander Thomson's translation of 
1796 cannot be determined. The original plot is as 
vapid as a plot could be. A wealthy East Indian 
is on the verge of marrying an English girl when 
his long-lost son, the girl's lover, unexpectedly 
turns up, and the father steps aside. 

But New York was not yet sated with German 
plays. The "Commercial Advertiser" of Novem- 
ber 9, 1799, voiced the general opinion when it 
expressed the hope that at the reopening of the 
theatre the old Kotzebuean favorites might again 
be seen, "with the addition of such other Diamonds 
as the Manager may have drawn from the German 
mine, during the leisure of summer." The first 
diamond to dazzle the eager eyes was "Self-immo- 
lation ; or, The Sacrifice of Love," a translation of 
the atrocious "Der Opfertod." Both McKee 25 and 
Wegelin have included it in their bibliographies of 
Dunlap, but the "History of the American The- 
atre" makes no mention of it whatever. The 
dramatis persona, as printed in the "Commercial 
Advertiser" of November 28, was identical with 
that of Neuman's translation published at Dublin 
earlier in the year under the exact title employed 
at New York. Dunlap always felt free to borrow 
from other translators, but he almost never 
adopted title and dramatis persona without at least 
a slight change. Since there is nothing to indicate 
his authorship, it seems evident that the New York 

23 Thomas J. McKee's introduction to 'The Father," 
No. 2 of Publications of the Dunlap Society, 1887, con- 
tains a list of Dunlap's plays. 



€f)e SDramatic €rangiation£ 2 1 7 

acting version of "Self-Immolation" was in reality 
Neuman's. 

The support of the Park Theatre in 1 799-1800 
was "False Shame; or, The American Orphan in 
Germany/' a serious comedy built around the idea 
that a false sense of delicacy, which prevents entire 
confidence between husbands and wives or lovers, 
is the cause of much unhappiness. An anonymous 
adaptation of "Falsche Scham" was printed in 
London in 1799, but Dunlap was under no obliga- 
tion to it. On this occasion he essayed an entirely 
independent rendering, with such results as might 
have been expected from a translator who was 
unused to trusting himself alone. His play is 
closely literal and often stiffly German in its 
idioms. It reproduces all the wordiness of the 
original, much of which might well be spared. 
Because of its too great fidelity it is one of our 
author's less satisfactory translations. But the plot 
is interesting if shallow, and the comedy was well 
received by the public and warmly praised by the 
critics. 

There is no evidence that Dunlap's version was 
ever published, although two editions have been 
ascribed to him, one printed at Charleston in 1800 
and the other at New York in the same year. Both, 
however, prove to be exact reprints of the anony- 
mous London play. Only one other American edi- 
tion is known, and it bears the name of Charles 
Smith. 26 

26 For the text of Dunlap's translation, I have con- 
sulted the manuscript in the Brown University Library. 



21 



J©iiliam ©uriap 



Perhaps the most skilful and independent of 
Dunlap's adaptations was "The Wild Goose 
Chace," acted early in 1800, — the first rendering 
of "Der Wildfang" into the English language to 
appear on any stage. It is a brisk farce, chiefly 
composed of the tricks by which Frederick, an 
amorous youth of one and twenty, attempts to woo 
and win Nannette, the daughter of an old dragon, 
Madam Brumbach. After a series of entertaining 
escapades, Frederick discovers that his tutor is the 
father of Nannette, and from him he gains per- 
mission to marry. 

This is another instance in which Dunlap did not 
rely on a previous translation for assistance, yet 
never did he do better work. He followed the Ger- 
man plot closely, and always reproduced the inten- 
tion of the author, but by a free textual rendering 
he enlivened and adorned a rather bare comedy. 
Kotzebue's terrific rate of composition often re- 
sulted in sketchiness and lack of finish. Dunlap 
in this instance expanded the hasty dialogue, 
adding spice and humor, and rounding out some 
of the characters. Baron Piffleburg, pursued by 
Madam Brumbach, especially profited in the altera- 
tion. From a somewhat meagre figure he became 
a distinct personality, a good acting part. Again, 
the shadowy hair-dresser was made a humorous 
Frenchman with a strong Gallic accent. Another 
change was the insertion of several songs without 
warrant from Kotzebue, a liberty often taken 
with him on the English stage. 27 Dunlap's pur- 
27 A. H. Thorndike, "Tragedy," p. 332. 



Cije SDramatic Cran^Iationg 2 1 9 

pose throughout was theatrical effectiveness, and 
he succeeded unusually well. 

"Der Wildfang" was also translated sometime 
in 1800 by Charles Smith, and printed as "The 
Wild Youth." Smith has already been mentioned 
in this chapter, so a word concerning him will be 
in place here. He was a New York bookseller and 
editor who set out to translate the whole of Kotze- 
bue, but after laboring through three plays his zeal 
abated and he relapsed into reprinting London 
editions. 28 Surely a more incompetent person 
never tortured foreign literature into the English 
language. His method was to reproduce the author 
with excruciating literalness, as a few clauses from 
the play under discussion will show: "I am with 
her but three weeks," "the second is run away," 
"she is beautiful like a rose," "just by that the 
soonest." From such a rival Dunlap had nothing 
to fear. 

Apparently the only British adaptation of the 

28 F. H. Wilkens, "Americana Germanica," Vol. Ill, 
p. 125. According to Mr. Wegelin's "Early American 
Plays," Smith's translations and reprints are these : 
"Count of Burgundy" (1798; however, the "Monthly 
Magazine," Vol. II, p. 135, said his first translation was 
made in 1800), "Self -Immolation" (1800), "The Wild 
Youth" (1800), "La Perouse" (1800), "The Virgin of the 
Sun" (1800), "Adelaide of Wulfingen" (1800), "The 
Force of Calumny" (1800), "The Happy Family" (1800), 
"Pizarro" (1800), "The East Indian" (1800), "Indigence 
and Nobleness of Mind" (1800), "The Widow and the 
Riding Horse" (1800), "False Shame; or, The American 
Orphan in Germany" (1800), "Abbe de l'lipee; or, The 
Orphan" (1801), "Fraternal Discord" (1801), "The Writ- 
ing Desk" (1801), "The Beautiful Unknown" (1803). 



220 JMliam 2Duniaj* 

piece was "Of Age Tomorrow," a musical enter- 
tainment by Thomas Dibdin, first acted on Feb- 
ruary i, 1800, and printed in 1805. It is a free and 
unsatisfactory version, the last act having been 
entirely omitted. 

Dunlap's success was acknowledged by the 
critics. The "Commercial Advertiser" of January 
25, 1800, favorably compared "The Wild Goose 
Chace" with the best English farces and comic 
operas, adding that it was enthusiastically re- 
ceived by an audience constantly convulsed with 
laughter. The "Monthly Magazine" pronounced 
this alteration more enjoyable than the original, 
and much superior to Smith's. His "is far too 
literal a version, and its language too flat and 
vulgar to afford us any pleasure in the perusal. 
. . . Mr. Dunlap is more bold and free; but this 
freedom is under the guidance of sound discretion. 
His experience, as director of the Theatre, has en- 
abled him to discern what would be most ac- 
ceptable, and to adapt his translation to the opinion 
and taste of the public." 29 But this article made 
one of the early protests against Kotzebue when it 
advised the pruning of the faulty opinions, the 
vulgarity and immorality of the German dramatist. 

About two weeks after the premiere of "The 
Wild Goose Chace," "The Force of Calumny," 
adapted by Dunlap from "Die Verlaumder," was 
performed. It presents a pathetic picture of the 
suspicion engendered and the misery endured 

29 Vol. Ill, p. 226. 



€fje SDramatic €ran£lation£ 2 2 1 

through malicious lying. In the end, of course, the 
misunderstanding is removed, and the calumniator 
punished. The play was not known on the English 
stage, but in 1799 Anne Plumptre published a 
translation, which Charles Smith reprinted in 1800. 
What relation Dunlap's version bore to the English 
cannot be determined, since his was not printed. 
Its vogue was not equal to that of several kindred 
efforts, yet the declaration of the "Commercial 
Advertiser" on February 7, 1800, that no play of 
Kotzebue's was so uniformly interesting, would 
indicate that it found admirers at its first ap- 
pearance. 

A second translation to which Dunlap's title is 
not clear is "The Count of Burgundy," first acted 
in March, 1800. It is not mentioned in the "His- 
tory of the American Theatre," but Ireland, Mc- 
Kee, and Wegelin have attributed it to him. 
Identity of dramatis personce 80 suggests that the 
American stage version was Plumptre's rendering, 
somewhat altered, perhaps, by the New York 
manager. I suppose the point cannot be deter- 
mined with certainty, and the inferiority of the 
original makes it a matter of little importance. 
"Der Graf von Burgund" deals with the time- 
honored theme of a youth raised in obscurity, who 
turns out to be the heir to a throne. It was cen- 
sured by the "Monthly Magazine" for its weari- 
someness and its lack of art and ingenuity. 31 

30 See "Commercial Advertiser," March 3, 1800, for the 
New York cast. 

31 Vol. II, pp. 133 ff. 



222 



IMIiam SDuniap 



One of Dunlap's most popular adaptations from 
the German was "The Virgin of the Sun," brought 
out in the spring of 1800. The year before, three 
versions had been published in London: Plump- 
tre's, Thompson's, and Lawrence's; it did not 
appear on the English stage, however, until 18 12. 
In 1800 Lawrence's rendering was reprinted by 
Charles Smith. Our author's play was constructed 
from the original with the help of Plumptre's lit- 
eral translation. The latter guided him through- 
out the task, but in only two places did he ap- 
propriate entire sections verbatim. He copied the 
last of Act II and the first of Act III, the best 
portions of her work. 

The events of the drama occur among the sun- 
worshipers of Peru. Cora, a virgin of the sun, is 
loved by Rolla, a native, and Alonzo, a Spaniard. 
For Alonzo she has broken her vow of chastity, 
and is about to become a mother. Rolla, convinced 
of their love, relinquishes his claims and promises 
to be as a brother. When the high priestess dis- 
covers Cora's plight she threatens her with living 
burial, but Cora is sure that she has done no wrong 
in thus obeying the voice of nature. The guilty 
pair are placed on trial before the king and priests. 
A sentence of death is about to be pronounced, 
when Rolla rushes in with a band of followers to 
enforce mercy. Cora persuades him to lay down 
his arms, whereupon the king pardons all the 
offenders. 

Dunlap's main alterations of both Kotzebue and 
Plumptre were an occasional rearrangement of 



€l>e 2Dramatic Cranglationg 223 

episodes, and — a feature praised by Genest 32 — a 
generous cutting of the long-winded verbiage 
which frequently retards the action and dulls the 
interest. It is no exaggeration to say that the play 
thus produced was more likely to go well than 
Kotzebue's or Plumptre's. Such was the opinion 
of his contemporaries. The "Monthly Magazine" 
spoke as follows : 

"The language of passion which he [Rolla] 
utters, sometimes borders, perhaps, on extrava- 
gance; but this is less discernible in the play of 
Mr. D. than in the original. In the former will 
be found but few of those faults in style and senti- 
ment which occur in the more literal and faithful 
translations. . . . The minuter differences of ex- 
pression, by which the original is softened and 
chastized, are too many to be particularized, and 
render the production of Mr. D., to an English 
reader, superior to other translations." 33 

There is reason to believe that Dunlap's printed 
version was not the one which first appeared at 
the Park Theatre. The "Commercial Advertiser" 
of March 15, 1800, called the stage play Miss 
Plumptre's, and correctly, I think. There is at the 
New York Society Library a copy of her transla- 
tion, altered as a prompt-book in Dunlap's unmis- 
takable penmanship. Considerable portions are 
cut and new renderings are freely substituted. It 
would seem that the manager doctored up 

32 Vol. VIII, p. 290. 

33 Vol. II, p. 367. 



2 24 JEHHtam SDunlag 

Plumptre in his haste to present another German 
novelty; then during the next two weeks he re- 
vised and improved his alteration, and sent it to the 
press. 

Just two weeks after the premiere of "The 
Virgin of the Sun," its sequel, "Pizarro in Peru; 
or, The Death of Rolla," was performed at the 
Park. It soon gained almost as much of a hold in 
America as it had in England, where at least four 
different translations were printed in 1799: 
Sheridan's, Dutton's, Lewis's, and Plumptre's. 
At New York, sometime in 1800, Smith published 
his "Pizarro," practically a copy of Sheridan. 

Dunlap's play was in the main a revision of 
Sheridan's very free adaptation, and approximately 
a third of the text was even copied directly from 
him. 

The story as told by Dunlap is substantially 
faithful to Kotzebue. Pizarro, a heartless Spanish 
conqueror, is invading Peru accompanied by El- 
vira, his mistress. Alonzo and Rolla, with other 
Peruvians, prepare to resist. Alonzo is captured 
by the Spaniards and imprisoned to await death, 
but Rolla succeeds in freeing him. As the Peru- 
vian is leaving the camp, he spies the child of Cora 
and Alonzo in the hands of the Spanish soldiers. 
Seizing the infant, he flees amid a shower of 
bullets, and escapes, with a fatal wound in his 
side. He reaches the retreat of the distracted pair, 
restores the child and dies. Thus Kotzebue ended 
the play. Sheridan added thrills by shortening 



€J)e 2Dramatic €ran£lationg 225 

this scene and annexing a combat between Alonzo 
and Pizarro, who suddenly rushes in and is slain, 
thanks to the intervention of Elvira. Dunlap 
wisely omitted Sheridan's last scene, and restored 
the author's closing lines, which he designated 
as "sublime." The New York version imitated 
Sheridan in placing on the stage instead of behind 
the scenes the spectacular flight with the child, in 
eliminating much of Kotzebue's superfluous wordi- 
ness, and in amplifying the sentimental passages. 
The "Monthly Magazine," in reviewing Dun- 
lap's "Pizarro," made this comment : 

"We have not, in the present instance, any 
reason to detract from the praise we have before 
bestowed on this gentleman as an able and judi- 
cious translator. His views being directed to the 
stage, he has been particularly careful to adapt 
his play for a popular exhibition. He has cut out 
many passages that render the dialogue heavy and 
tiresome, or which seemed liable to weaken the 
dramatic effect of the scenes." He is commended 
for "adhering to his author in the conclusion of 
the play, which is greatly weakened by the change 
introduced in that of Mr. Sheridan." 34 

Judging from the success of the last two dramas, 
the New York playgoers were as enthusiastic over 
the German wonder as ever. The folk behind the 
footlights, however, were tiring of the incessant 
Kotzebue. In the words of the harassed manager, 

34 Vol. Ill, p. 454- 



226 f©ifliam EDtinJap 

"those plays which attracted the public, and gave 
bread to some and means of destructive indulgence 
to others, were stigmatized by the actors as Dutch 
stuff, and by other epithets equally character- 
istic." 35 

The next two or three dramas failed to receive 
the support accorded to their predecessors— per- 
haps an indication that the public was beginning 
to agree with the actors. On April 21, 1800, "The 
Corsicans" made its bow in a version of dubious 
origin. McKee and Wegelin have called it Dun- 
lap's, but it is not mentioned in the "American 
Theatre," and Ireland does not suggest a trans- 
lator. The drama was not acted in England, but 
an anonymous rendering was printed at London in 
1799, which Dunlap may have employed, with 
alterations, on the stage of the Park Theatre. 

Two days after "The Corsicans," "The Stran- 
ger's Birthday," a sequel to "The Stranger," was 
performed. It was rendered from "Die Edle 
Luge," already translated in England by Maria 
Geisweiler as "The Noble Lie." Again Kotzebue 
presented the Stranger — now called Baron Mei- 
nau — and Eulalia. She still suffers remorse for 
her early sin, and feels herself unworthy of her 
husband. To comfort her, he deceives her into 
believing that he has seduced the servant girl. In- 
advertently learning the truth, she is deeply 
touched by his nobility, and presumably banishes 

35 "American Theatre," p. 276. 



Cfjc SDramattt €ran£lationg 227 

her self -contempt. Dunlap's version of this in- 
excusable play was never printed. 

That Kotzebue was no longer swallowed whole 
was more than hinted in a comment in the "Com- 
mercial Advertiser" of May 19, 1800: 

"Our stage has been so inundated of late, I had 
almost said disgraced, with the wretched pro- 
ductions of the Holcrofts, the Reynoldses, the 
Mortons, the Kotzebues (the exception of some 
few plays) and a tribe of other such writers, that 
it is high time to make a stand against a torrent 
which threatens to vitiate not only taste but 
morals." 

The last new German drama of the season was 
"The Happy Family," rendered from "Die Sil- 
berne Hochzeit." McKee has attributed this title 
to the New York manager in spite of his definite 
statement that it was "an English version" which 
he staged. 36 In the Society Library, among a 
number of plays signed by Dunlap, there are two 
copies of Thompson's rendering of "The Happy 
Family" as reprinted by Charles Smith. One copy 
bears the words "Cut for the part of Lewis" in 
Dunlap's hand; the other, apparently the prompt- 
book, is greatly reduced and altered, with occasional 
textual changes, all in the manager's penman- 
ship. I think the conclusion is obvious that "The 
Happy Family" must be omitted from our trans- 
lator's bibliography. 

se "American Theatre," p. 282. 



228 JMIiam SDunlaj* 

Early in the fall season of 1800 "Fraternal Dis- 
cord/' another novelty from the prolific pen of 
Kotzebue, won the approbation of the public. 
London was already familiar with the play through 
Ludger's unacted translation, printed in 1799 as 
"The Reconciliation; or, The Birth-Day," and 
through Dibdin's "Birth-Day," acted in 1799 and 
printed in 1800. 

"Die Versohnung" is among the sanest efforts 
of the Teutonic dramatist. It presents a rather 
pleasing picture of middle-class life. Two elderly 
brothers have been engaged for fifteen years in a 
lawsuit with each other over a garden. Philip is 
an impoverished consumptive with a daughter, 
Charlotte. Franz is a well-to-do bachelor, an ex- 
sea captain. Charlotte and her lover, Philip's 
doctor, finally effect a reconciliation. 

"Fraternal Discord" is as completely his own 
as any of Dunlap's Kotzebuean adaptations. There 
is some evidence that he was familiar with 
Ludger's version, but he borrowed almost nothing 
from it, and his result differs materially from 
this stiffly literal rendering. Dibdin's play is a 
radical alteration to which he was even less in- 
debted. "Fraternal Discord" may then be con- 
sidered an independent translation, and a very 
skilful one. Some of the weaker scenes and more 
unnecessary dialogue are omitted, and the whole 
is clad in a garb of colloquial, natural English, pro- 
ducing a smoothly idiomatic play. The "Monthly 
Magazine," while decrying the London versions as 
stupid and mutilated, said : 



€ije 2Dramatic €tan£lation£ 229 

"Fraternal Discord is a translation from Kotze- 
bue's Versohnung, oder Bruder's Twist, by Mr. 
Dunlap, and is, in our opinion, one of the most 
pleasing pieces of that popular author. Its plot 
is simple, yet sufficiently abounding in incident; 
its moral is excellent, and its dialogue appropriate 
and elegant. . . . The manager, in his translation, 
appears to have done justice to the original, and 
to have retained a due regard for the English 
language, and the taste of his audience." 37 

Dunlap himself considered it "perhaps the most 
meritorious of the many translations and altera- 
tions which came from his pen." 38 

New York received the play most cordially, and 
yet divers intelligent people were beginning to 
wonder whether, after all, Kotzebue would rank 
with the immortals. One writer thus expressed it : 

"No dramatist appears to have gained so sudden 
and extensive a reputation as Kotzebue. No other 
has been able to command the united suffrages of 
distant and different nations in his favour. Cen- 
turies have elapsed before an author has been 
much, or generally, known out of his native 
country. His performances may be read by the 
few ; but to be translated into different languages, 
and usurp the place of native productions on the 
theatres of other nations, is a destiny extraordinary 
and unprecedented. . . . But popular favour is 
capricious, and it may be fairly questioned whether 

" Vol. Ill, p. 380. 

38 "American Theatre," p. 281. 



230 IMliam 2Dimla# 

the fame of this dramatist rests on a solid basis, 
or bids fair to be as durable as it is great ; whether 
he is to excite our wonder, and pass like a brilliant 
meteor, or to remain a fixed luminary in the lit- 
erary horizon. There is sometimes a fashion in 
the prevailing opinions of the world, in the matters 
of literature and science, as well as in dress and 
equipage; and the present teutonick fashion of 
writing may be as transient as any other kind." 39 

The final German translation that Dunlap gave 
to the New York stage was "The Blind Boy." It 
was taken from "Das Epigramm," a sentimental 
comedy in which a young doctor, who has in- 
curred the hostility of a very self-important 
woman, makes amends by restoring the sight of 
her blind son. Once more the adapter worked in- 
dependently, for the play had not been, and was 
not to be, translated in England. How well he 
performed his task I cannot say, since the drama 
seems never to have been printed. 40 The fact 
that "The Blind Boy" was presented only a very 
few times does not indicate that it was inferior to 
its predecessors, but that New York had lost its 
zest for Kotzebue. 

39 "Monthly Magazine," Vol. Ill, p. 453. 

40 Dunlap said nothing as to its publication ; Wegelin 
states ("Bibliographical Checklist of the Plays and Mis- 
cellaneous Writings of William Dunlap," No. 26) that it 
was printed in 1808, but his description : "A Melo-Drama, 
in two acts, pp. 40," corresponds exactly with W. B. 
Hewetson's original "Blind Boy," London, 1808, and does 
not fit a translation of Kotzebue's four-act domestic com- 
edy. 






€f)e 2Dramatic €ranglationg 2 3 1 

"La Perouse" was Dunlap's sole adaptation not 
to appear in the theatre. That he translated the 
piece we know from its inclusion in his bibli- 
ography and in the prospectus of his selected 
plays ; but when he did so, or why it was not acted, 
there is no way of determining. "La Perouse" 
was well known in London. Renderings by 
Plumptre and Thompson were printed in 1799; 
early in 1801 J. Fawcett's pantomime, based on the 
play, made something of a sensation ; and later in 
the year Thompson's version was performed. 41 
But not until 181 1 did this drama of life on a 
desolate island reach the New York stage, and 
then only in the pantomimic form. 

Though Dunlap was the adapter of the majority 
of Kotzebue's plays seen at the Park Theatre, yet 
other translators were also represented, for any 
satisfactory rendering was welcome. During his 
managership the following translations from the 
German dramatist were given: 

First acted Translator 

"The Stranger" Dunlap 

December 10, 1798 

"Lovers' Vows" Dunlap 

March 11, 1799 

"Count Benyowski" Dunlap 

April 1, 1799 

"Indians in England" Dunlap 

June 14, 1799 

41 Sellier, pp. 73, 75. 



232 IMiiam 2Dunia# 

First acted Translator 

"Self -Immolation" Neuman(?) 

November 29, 1799 

"False Shame" Dunlap 

December 11, 1799 

"The Wild Goose Chace" Dunlap 

January 24, 1800 

"The Force of Calumny" Dunlap 

February 5, 1800 
"The Count of Burgundy" Uncertain 

March 3, 1800 
"The Virgin of the Sun" Dunlap 

March 12, 1800 
"Pizarro" Dunlap 

March 26, 1800 
"Sighs; or, The Daughter" Hoare 

April 16, 1800 
"The Corsicans" Uncertain 

April 21, 1800 
"The Stranger's Birthday" Dunlap 

April 23, 1800 

"The Horse and the Widow" Dibdin 

May 5, 1800 
"Joanna of Montfaucon" .... Cumberland 

May 28, 1800 
"The Wise Man of the East" .... Inchbald 

May 30, 1800 
"The Happy Family" Thompson 

June 2, 1800 

"Fraternal Discord" Dunlap 

October 24, 1800 
"The Blind Boy" Dunlap 

March 30, 1803 



€fje 2Dramatic €ran£lationg 233 

We see that the New York director brought 
out twenty plays, against only fourteen on the 
London stage during the corresponding period. 
It may occasion some surprise that Dunlap, with 
his high ambition for a moral and elevating theatre, 
should thus have thrown the doors of his establish- 
ment open to a dramatist who disregarded the 
most fundamental precepts of accepted morality. 
Perhaps the German's democratic principles so 
often enunciated, and his sentimentalism so con- 
stantly flaunted, blinded the eyes of the American 
manager ; perhaps Kotzebue's iconoclasm appealed 
to him in this period of Godwinian discipleship ; 
perhaps he connived somewhat at the objection- 
able qualities in consideration of his pocket-book. 
It should be said, however, that he expurgated as 
much as possible, and left some of the most 
prurient plays untranslated. 

Though greatly admiring Kotzebue, Dunlap 
never idolized him, if his opinion was accurately 
reflected in the works written in after years. 
Neither did he denounce him as many did when 
the novelty had worn off. From the "History of 
the American Theatre" I quote : "Kotzebue is far 
beneath many of the German dramatists." "Kotze- 
bue's great talent was facility of invention; his 
incidents are admirable; his delineation of char- 
acter is often fine ; but many of his characters par- 
take of the age in which he lived, and of his own 
false philosophy and false estimate of the founda- 
tion on which society ought to rest." 42 In the 

42 pp. 254, 258. 



234 iDiUtamSDunlajt 

"Memoirs of Cooke," after condemning the Eng- 
lish playwrights who tried to put down German 
literature, and the English translators who "suc- 
ceeded in darkening its brightness by a most thick, 
and sometimes impenetrable, fogginess," he went 
on to say: "As my admiration of the German 
dramatists was not founded on the praise of the 
English writers, so my opinion has not been shaken 
by their censure." 43 

The years of the Kotzebue fever in America 
were 1799 and 1800. The inoculation took place 
in December, 1798, and shortly the epidemic was 
raging. During 1799, out of approximately one 
hundred playing nights, at least thirty perform- 
ances of Kotzebue were advertised; and in 1800, 
out of about one hundred and twenty-five nights, 
he held the boards at least fifty times. The next 
year started briskly with eight performances in 
January, but the German onslaught met a sudden 
and final check, for the remainder of 1801 saw but 
a dozen or so exhibitions of Teutonic drama, and 
1802 sank to four or five. Thereafter the "second 
Shakespeare" was represented only by an occa- 
sional performance of "The Stranger," "Pizarro," 
"Lovers' Vows," or "Fraternal Discord," the four 
plays which retained the most persistent hold on 
the New York stage. This sudden slump in the 
career of the reigning favorite was the result of a 
similar catastrophe in London, the fashion-maker 
of New York, and of a perfectly natural reaction 
against the superficiality and falseness that had 
just been so eagerly applauded. 

43 Vol. I, pp. 276-7. 



€|>e SDramatic €ran£lationg 235 

During the fat years Kotzebue held a very prom- 
inent place in the newspapers and magazines of 
the city. Each new piece was heralded before, and 
lauded after, its appearance. Each performance 
was reviewed with praise or blame for the actors 
as they reached or missed the author's heights. 
The English adulation of the great dramatist was 
reprinted, and biographical notices concerning him 
were frequently inserted. Besides the translations 
by Dunlap and Smith, various British versions of 
his plays and a few of his novels and other writ- 
ings were published in New York. The German 
invasion, however, as we have seen, was not ac- 
complished without some resistance. New York 
did not develop an opposition party as London did, 
but individual expressions of disapproval were not 
lacking, and these became increasingly prominent 
as time went on. 

It is not to be assumed that New York was the 
only city in the United States in which Kotzebue 
was the dramatic hero. His plays reached Phila- 
delphia shortly after their introduction to America, 
and between 1799 and 1802 they practically domi- 
nated the stage. "False Shame," "The Wild Goose 
Chace," and probably others of Dunlap's trans- 
lating were given. 44 In the Boston theatre also 
the German playwright was well represented. 
Dunlap spoke of "Count Benyowski" and other 
adaptations of his being acted there in the fall of 



44 C. F. Brede, "German-American Annals," new series, 
Vol. Ill, p. 265 ; see same writer and journal, new series, 
Vol. X, pp. 106-149, for a discussion of Kotzebue on the 
Philadelphia stage. 



236 iMliam 2DunIaj> 

1799. "Pizarro," admirably brought out in 1800, 
had a long and successful run. 45 Charleston wit- 
nessed a few of the dramas, including "Fraternal 
Discord," in 1803-4, 46 and probably this was not 
their first season at that place. It is to be noted 
that wherever Kotzebue's works were acted, Dun- 
lap was to some extent the purveyor thereof. 

The effect of this craze on American drama was 
less than one might have expected from its mag- 
nitude. The plays known to this country were 
of two main types: dramas centered about pro- 
tagonists and dealing with remote times and places, 
such as "Pizarro," "Benyowski," and "Adelaide 
of Wulfingen" ; and semi-realistic dramas of con- 
temporary life, like "The Stranger," "Self-im- 
molation," and "Fraternal Discord." Perhaps 
fewer examples of the first type could be found in 
our literature after 1800 than before, and those 
few were as much indebted to Schiller as to Kotze- 
bue. The second had been one of the prevailing 
types in America since Tyler's "Contrast" in 1787. 
Kotzebue's favorite motifs, sentimentality and 
discovery of kinship, were much used here years 
before "The Stranger's" advent. The Kotzebuean 
species of sentimentality which arose from affect- 
ing pictures of family life, was never much em- 
ployed by our dramatists, who preferred the 
distressed-lover theme. The German writer's in- 
fluence, then, consisted more in confirming certain 

45 "American Theatre/' p. 273 ; W. W. Clapp, "A Rec- 
ord of the Boston Stage," p. 74. 

46 "American Theatre," pp. 369-70. 



€t>e SDramatit €ranglation£ 237 

tendencies already existent in this country, than in 
introducing any new ones. 

As a final word on Kotzebue in America, it may 
be well to point to the fact that his vogue here was 
almost simultaneous with his fame abroad, and 
by completing the circle of his triumphs gave him 
a distinction never before achieved by a man of 
letters. Whereas other writers had gained a 
foreign standing gradually, if at all, and usually 
not till after their death, he leaped, almost at one 
bound, into a place of the first literary importance 
in all the leading countries of the world. This re- 
markable accomplishment was the result of his 
unquestioned theatrical skill, his sentimentality, 
and his revolutionary ideas. In this country his 
political philosophy was especially congenial to the 
Republican party, then rising into power. But 
perhaps the main cause of his popularity in the 
United States was the furore which he created on 
the other side of the Atlantic. 



Ill 

Kotzebue was not the only German dramatist of 
whom Dunlap made capital. Having profited by 
these labors, in 1799 he turned his attention to 
Schiller. "The Robbers" was his only play known 
on our stage, and it was not at all well known. It 
was first given at New York in 1795 and not re- 
peated until 1798, so far as I have discovered. 47 

47 See ante, p. 162; "Commercial Advertiser," June 7, 
1798. 



238 JMIiam SPunlap 

Dunlap's translation of "Don Carlos," acted in 
May, 1799, did not enhance Schiller's reputation in 
the United States; it was not a sufficient success 
to warrant repetition or publication. This tre- 
mendously long drama on Spanish history seems 
scarcely adapted to the taste and habits of an 
American audience. Dunlap curtailed it, so he has 
told us, and probably it lost much of its original 
force in the process. Thanks to adapter and 
actors, the play "was unmercifully shorn of its 
beams." 48 "Don Carlos" was not known to the 
English stage, but two adaptations were printed in 
England in 1798, of which the New York manager 
may have made some use. 

Three years later "Fiesco" was given at the 
Park. McKee attributed the translation to Dun- 
lap, but there is no proof that this is correct. His 
statement is merely : "On the 26th of March, 1802, 
Schiller's Fiesco was performed (Cooper play- 
ing Fiesco) ; it was coldly received." 49 A copy of 
the drama in German was included in Dunlap's 
library, and he at one time translated a portion of 
it, 50 but we do not know that he ever finished it. 
Perhaps the New York version was an abbrevia- 
tion of the rendering made in English in 1796. 

The "Monthly Magazine" for December, 1800, 
contained this notice: "We understand that the 
Manager is preparing for the stage, a German 

48 "American Theatre," p. 262. 

49 Ibid., p. 294. 

so Diary, Vol. XV, pp. 66-7- • 



€tje SDramatic €rang!ation£ 239 

drama, called Abaellino, which, in sublimity, is 
thought superior to the Robbers, and in its 
denouement to exceed the Stranger." ' 51 Early 
the next year this dramatic gem appeared. First 
written as a novel in 1793 by Johann Heinrich 
Daniel Zschokke, "Aballino der Grosse Bandit" 
was soon dramatized by him and published in 1795. 
Within a short time it was to be seen in most of 
the theatres of Germany. Its international career 
was long and brilliant. Translations were made 
into Dutch, French, Spanish, Polish, Danish, and 
English, and in various disguises it was acted all 
over Europe. 52 

Dunlap was the first to turn "Aballino" into 
English. The earliest British versions were those 
of M. G. Lewis and R. W. Elliston, both made in 
1805. Unfortunately I have failed to find a copy 
of the German play (except a later poetic revision) 
in this country; hence I have been unable to com- 
pare the translation with the original. But prob- 
ably the American adapter adhered fairly closely 
to the text, as his custom was. 

In the New York edition the plot is this : A bael- 
lino, a bravo, is terrorizing Venice by his assas- 
sinations. Great efforts are made to capture him, 
but without success. Flodoardo, a young Venetian 
in love with Rosamonda, the Doge's niece, as- 
sumes the task of exterminating Abaellino. But 
the bandit's outrages continue, many prominent 

51 Vol. Ill, p. 456. 

52 J. P. Hoskins, "Publications of the Modern Lan- 
guage Association," Vol. XX, p. 283. 



240 i©illiam SDunlap 

citizens falling under his dagger. Finally at a 
State reception, Abaellino suddenly appears, and 
whisking off his horrible mask, reveals the hand- 
some Flo do ar do. Then he points out the con- 
spirators for whose detection he had assumed the 
manner and disguise of a bravo, mysteriously pro- 
duces his supposed victims, and receives the hand 
of Rosamonda. 

This wildly extravagant affair met the entire ap- 
proval of New York, as well as of numerous other 
American cities where it was played. 

One of the least successful of the German adap- 
tations was "Peter the Great; or, The Russian 
Mother," which came out in the fall of 1802. It 
was based on "Die Strelizen," written in 1790 by 
Joseph Marius Babo. The play concerns itself 
with a conspiracy of the Strelitz 53 against Peter 
the Great. The plot is discovered, and the young 
leader is about to be executed, but his mother 
prevails upon the Czar to spare him. 

As usual, Dunlap's version carefully followed 
the outlines of the original, though with judicious 
compression of the dialogue, and without any at- 
tempt at literal translation. Some of the diffi- 
cult Russian names were simplified — for instance, 
Prostoserdof was changed to Orloff — and one or 
two minor characters were expanded, especially 

53 The Strelitz was a body of troops which formed the 
greater part of the Russian army in the sixteenth and 
seventeenth centuries. They were brave in battle, but so 
given to mutiny in peace that Peter the Great abolished 
the force. 



€|je SDramatic Crangiationg 24 1 

the indefinitely foreign officer, who became at his 
hands a debonair Frenchman. In short, Dunlap 
altered "Die Strelizen" into a somewhat American- 
ized drama in easy and flexible English. Its lack 
of popularity in New York is not surprising, be- 
cause the original has but little theatrical pos- 
sibility. 

The shortest of the foreign renderings is "The 
Good Neighbor; An Interlude in One Act. 
Altered from a scene of Inland's." It centers 
about a kindly old man who serves as a sort of 
community mediator and peace-maker. I have 
been unable to locate the play of IfBand's from 
which the sketch was taken. "Nachbarschaft" is 
immediately suggested by the title, but I find no 
resemblance in subject-matter. Probably Dunlap 
took the idea from a portion of one of IfBand's 
dramas, and worked it up to suit himself. 

Considering Dunlap's translations as a whole, 
we find much of that dependence on the work of 
others which characterized his original plays. Not 
more than one third of his adaptations were made 
without the authority of previous British versions. 
Much as he deplored the partiality of America for 
the literature of Great Britain, he found it ex- 
pedient to follow that literature as a standard. 
In the case of Kotzebue it was his usual practice 
to bring forward on the New York stage those 
dramas which made the greatest sensation in 
London, though occasionally he anticipated the 



242 iMIiam SDunlap 

English premiere. This adherence to foreign 
precedent, however, was not solely the result of 
mental dependence on Dunlap's part ; it was rather 
the most satisfactory solution of a very difficult 
problem. Given a theatre rushing toward bank- 
ruptcy and an audience prejudiced in favor of the 
London product, self-preservation required that 
London be taken as the model. If often Dunlap's 
dependence was not confined to the choice of the 
play, but involved also textual borrowing, it should 
be attributed to imperative haste and not to in- 
capacity. When he set himself to the task he could 
make an independent translation equal to any of 
his English rivals, as "The Wild Goose Chace" 
and "Fraternal Discord" clearly show. 

Dunlap's merits as a translator were of no mean 
order. He always held the author's intention in 
respect, yet he almost never fell into the error of 
rendering literally. By reproducing the ideas in 
facile, conversational English, by cutting redun- 
dancies, and by amplifying undeveloped spots,— in 
a word, by applying his knowledge of stage re- 
quirements to another writer's material, he often 
constructed a play equaling or surpassing the 
original. 

The service of William Dunlap to American 
literature through his translations was intangible, 
but real none the less. Before 1799 America had 
but the barest acquaintance with the drama of the 
Continent. England held the boards to the ex- 
clusion of other nations. For the dramatic lit- 
erature of France and Germany Dunlap made a 



€l)e 2Dramatic €ran£lationg 243 

large place on the stage of New York, and called 
it strongly to the attention of other cities where 
his adaptations were acted and his example im- 
itated. Thus he helped give the United States a 
more cosmopolitan view of contemporary culture. 
Though the plays which he exploited were of little 
permanence, yet they aided in establishing literary 
intercourse between America and Europe. Two 
immediate results of this heightened interest in 
foreign drama were the greatly increased popu- 
larity of Schiller in this country after 1800, and 
the work of John Howard Payne as a translator of 
French plays. 

If Dunlap played some part in lessening the 
provincialism of the United States in its youth, 
and in broadening its outlook on the world of 
letters, surely he deserves our respect and gratitude 
as a contributor to our literary development. 



CHAPTER V 
The Non-Dramatic Writings 

NOBODY reads Dunlap's plays to-day, and 
nobody visits an art museum to see his 
pictures. These products belonged to the age 
which gave them being, and with it they passed 
away. But a third phase of his work still retains 
an importance that it will not soon lose. It is as an 
investigator and recorder of facts that he possesses 
a present-day value. He knew some interesting 
people of his generation ; he was a leader in various 
activities ; he was a close observer of all that went 
on about him, as well as a careful student of that 
which had preceded. Of the things he knew best, 
he wrote, and we are yet indebted to him for hav- 
ing done so. 



The "Memoirs of the Life of George Frederick 
Cooke" had its place in the development of Ameri- 
can biography. In order to understand its sig- 
nificance, we must look at a few early examples 
of this department of our literature. Among the 
first attempts at memoir writing was John Nor- 
ton's "Life and Death of that deservedly famous 
man of God, Mr. John Cotton," published in 1658. 
As the title suggests, it was more sermon than 
biography ; the narrative of John Cotton's life was 
244 






€lje i^omSDramatit tBritingg 245 

used as a vehicle for a great deal of moralizing. 
Nothing like a well-rounded picture of the man 
was given, for the emphasis was wholly on the 
religious aspects. The formula employed by John 
Norton prevailed for over a century. Cotton 
Mather, Samuel Mather, Ebenezer Turrell, and 
other biographers wrote in the laudatory, didactic, 
and one-sided manner of their forerunner. 

By 1800 the method was beginning to undergo a 
change. One of the first memoirs of the nine- 
teenth century was Weems's "Life of Washington." 
To be sure, Weems exalted his hero to the clouds, 
and never lost an opportunity to point a moral, 
even as his predecessors had done; but in laying 
greater stress on private life and general affairs, he 
took a forward step. Another tendency, almost 
entirely absent previously, is well illustrated in 
Cheetham's "Life of Thomas Paine" (1809)— a 
tendency to disregard the doctrine of "de mortuis 
nil nisi bonum." Indeed, Cheetham's book is a 
scathing denunciation of Paine's character and 
deeds. 

The "Memoirs of Cooke" was a joint product of 
the older and newer methods. Like the pious 
biographies of the eighteenth century it aimed to 
serve the cause of morality; but, decidedly unlike 
them, it did so, not by detailing the blameless 
career of a devout clergyman, but by frankly re- 
vealing the errors of a dissipated actor. If the 
moral purpose was inherited from the past, the 
subject-matter was of the newer and less idolatrous 
school, for we hear less praise of Cooke's majestic 



246 i©tfliam SDunlajt 

acting than condemnation of his inebriety. This 
means that the picture is not so one-sided as in the 
earlier biographies. In them we saw only the 
preacher or the ideal Christian ; in this we see the 
actor and the man, the genius and the brute. The 
Philadelphia "Port Folio" spoke truly when it said 
of Dunlap: "He deserves the thanks of his 
countrymen for making so bold and intrepid a 
stand in favour of legitimate biography." 1 

In writing the "Memoirs," Dunlap relied for his 
information on Cooke's rather fragmentary diaries, 
and on his own acquaintance with him. From 
these sources he strung out an 800-page narrative, 
which probably was not considered too long in 
that leisurely, two-volume age. The first volume 
and about a third of the second are taken up with 
the player's English career ; the remainder presents 
a detailed review of his two years in America. We 
are given some idea of that indescribable thing, a 
great actor's mode of acting. We are introduced 
to his manner of life and his opinions on various 
subjects. We are offered lengthy extracts from 
his journals. We are entertained with number- 
less anecdotes. Entirely too much space is de- 
voted to gossip and scandal. The reader is not 
particularly edified by an account of each of the 
player's debauches. Indeed, Dunlap's zeal for 
temperance may have led him to exaggerate 
Cooke's alcoholic excesses, or to give them a 
semblance of greater frequency than was con- 
sistent with the truth. Some of Cooke's associates, 

1 Third series, Vol. I, p. 554- 






€lje iJlon-SDramatic i©riting£ 247 

especially W. B. Wood and J. W. Francis, have 
testified that the biographer presented an unjust 
picture of the actor. 2 It is to be regretted that he 
did not omit some of the gossipy padding, and 
substitute a discussion of the conditions in the 
American theatre at this period. 

The "Memoirs of Cooke" is not Dunlap's most 
excellent production. It is, however, interesting 
reading, it is our main source of information about 
a distinguished player, and it is something of a 
landmark in the development of impartial bi- 
ography. 

One of the most pleasant friendships among 
early American men of letters was that of Charles 
Brockden Brown and William Dunlap, and it is 
fitting that the latter should have written our 
standard biography of the novelist. It is, to be 
sure, a very imperfect performance, but for this 
the author was not altogether to blame. Before 
the task was put into his hands, it had been under- 
taken by Paul Allen of Baltimore, who had gone 
so far as to print copious selections from Brown's 
rarer writings for inclusion in Volume I. 3 When 
the commission was given to Dunlap, it was agreed 
that these selections should stand. Much as he 
resented this encumbrance which occupied about 
seven-eighths of the volume, he was under the ne- 
cessity of retaining it, and of inserting his material 

2 Wood, "Personal Recollections of the Stage," Phila- 
delphia, 1855, p. 163 ; Francis, "Old New York," p. 205. 

3 "Arts of Design," Vol. I, p. 272. 



248 t©illiam 2Dimlap 

wherever convenient openings could be found. Of 
the arrangement of the second volume he had com- 
plete control, and its construction is much superior 
to the first. Ninety continuous pages are given to 
biography and criticism; then follow about thirty 
pages of letters, and about three hundred and fifty 
pages of extracts and fragments. The work had 
been designed both as a memoir and as a repository 
for some of Brown's manuscripts and rare printed 
writings ; hence a disproportion between selections 
and biography for which Dunlap was not re- 
sponsible. But the modern reader is disposed to 
desire an exchange of most of the extracts for 
more letters and passages from the journal. The 
English edition of 1822 in some measure improved 
the work by reducing the whole to one volume of 
three hundred and thirty-seven pages with a con- 
tinuous text, and an appendix containing the more 
important selections in the American edition. 

The biographical portion, which is not over one 
hundred and thirty-five pages long, begins with an 
account, probably somewhat idealized, of Brown's 
precocious youth. His difficulty in choosing a pro- 
fession, his attempts at law study, and his refusal 
to enter the practice are discussed. Then comes 
his New York residence, with its many friend- 
ships and literary activities. After his return to 
Philadelphia in 1801, the narrative proceeds 
rapidly to his death in 1810, and ends with a grace- 
ful eulogy. Brown's habits of mind and methods 
of literary work are discussed, and there is con- 
siderable judicious criticism of the novels. It is 




Charles Brockden Brown 

From a miniature by William Dunlap, about 1806 



€|>e l^omSDramatic iE)riting£ 249 

stated at the outset that the subject's chief claim 
to interest is as a pioneer, that planlessness and in- 
completeness mark his writings, and that his talent, 
though great, was undeveloped. No attempt is 
made to give undue credit, yet the treatment is 
kindly and admiring. For Brown's personality 
the author has hearty praise, but never extravagant 
adulation. 

Like the "Memoirs of Cooke," the "Life of 
Brown" shows the influence of the newer bio- 
graphical method. While the main stress is prop- 
erly on the literary side, yet other interests and ac- 
tivities are not neglected. An effort is also made 
to judge the novelist's merits impartially, and to 
avoid indiscriminate laudation. 

There is room for a new biography of Charles 
Brockden Brown, and it is to be hoped that some 
one may soon undertake it, so that we may have a 
completer record of his life, especially after 1800, 
than we at present possess. Meanwhile American 
literature is under obligation to Dunlap for nearly 
all that is known about our first professional man 
of letters. 4 

4 When Herring and Longacre were projecting the 
"National Portrait Gallery," Dunlap was asked to furnish 
a biography of Brown. For this purpose he condensed 
his book to a very creditable sketch, and added a little 
new material of some importance. It was published in 
Volume III in 1836, accompanied by a portrait of the 
novelist, engraved from Dunlap's miniature painted in 
1806. 



2 5o J©iHiam SDunlap 



ii 

The spectacular drama of the rise and fall of 
Napoleon Bonaparte was approaching its denoue- 
ment in 1814. Dunlap, like most of his country- 
men, rejoiced when the tide of victory turned 
against the dictator of Europe, and in two his- 
torical sketches he recounted the events which led 
to the Emperor's overthrow. 

In 18 1 2 Francis L. Clarke published at London 
a life of Wellington, who was then conducting the 
campaign in the Spanish Peninsula. Clarke's ac- 
count extended to the siege of Burgos in the fall 
of 1812. The work was printed in New York in 
1 8 14 with a 54-page supplement by Dunlap, con- 
tinuing the story of Wellington's triumphs from 
the siege of Burgos to the capitulation of Bordeaux 
in the spring of 18 14. His statements were based 
mainly on the official despatches of Wellington and 
his generals, and of course showed the Duke in a 
favorable light, but without the flattery that Clarke 
lavished on him. 

In the "Life of Wellington" Dunlap prophesied 
the early downfall of the French tyrant. In a 
second sketch he dealt with the fulfilment of this 
prophecy. His "Narrative of the Events which 
followed Bonaparte's Campaign in Russia to the 
Period of his Dethronement" was published at 
Hartford in 1814 both separately and as a sup- 
plement to an edition of Sir Robert Ker Porter's 



€l)e IJott^Drattiatic f©ritingg 2 5 1 

"Narrative of the Campaign in Russia, During the 
Year 1812," first issued at London in 1813. Dun- 
lap's account, seventy-five pages in length, begins 
after the flight from Russia, and embraces the 
battle of Leipzig, the capture of Paris, the banish- 
ment to Elba, and the establishment of the new 
French government. In discussing the reorganiza- 
tion of France, the historian showed himself a 
thorough American by deprecating the substitution 
of one unqualified monarchy for another when the 
time was ripe for a republic. 

These two fragments are reasonably accurate, 
but their manner of procedure is open to criticism. 
Each is a solid mass of detailed military opera- 
tions, related in a juiceless and pedestrian fashion, 
and almost unrelieved by considerations of larger 
significance than the number of attacks on a given 
position or the size of the armies involved. 

Long years of participation in the dramatic 
affairs of the United States gave Dunlap a know- 
ledge of their history which few of his contempo- 
raries possessed, and it is especially fortunate that 
he had the inclination as well as the ability to 
chronicle the progress of those affairs. 5 In the 
preface to the "American Theatre" he said, quoting 
Colley Gibber, whose "Apology" served as a sort of 
model for him : "If I have any particular qualifica- 

5 Dunlap was not the first to make a phase of American 
culture the subject of a history. At least one work of 
this nature had already appeared, namely, Isaiah Thomas's 
"History of Printing in America," published in 1810. 



252 t©iliiam SDuntap 

tion for the task more than another, it is that I 
am perhaps the only person living (however un- 
worthy) from whom the same materials can be 
collected." 

For his facts he relied to some extent on the 
assistance of others : the investigations of his 
friends; the reminiscences of Lewis Hallam, who 
had come to this country as a boy in 1752, and of 
W. B. Wood of Philadelphia; and contributions 
by John Dunlap on Kotzebue and Schiller. But 
chiefly he relied on his own researches and on his 
journals and recollections covering a period of 
twenty or twenty-five years. The chronicle ex- 
tends from the middle of the eighteenth century to 
the coming of Cooke in 1810. It is interspersed 
with sketches of the leading actors and play- 
wrights, anecdotes of the stage, and opinions on 
various problems connected with the drama. 

The book has many faults, not the least being 
occasional inaccuracy of statements. At the start 
the writer made the mistake of ascribing the 
origin of American histrionic art to the Hallam 
Company in 1752, whereas subsequent investiga- 
tion has found that the profession was followed 
half a century before. Because his researches had 
not been carried back of this date, he was in error 
concerning the beginnings in nearly all the towns 
where the drama gained an early foothold. And 
in dealing with later events he sometimes stumbled 
over a date, or otherwise gave misinformation. 

Another serious fault, — the book is not free 
from partiality. Certain actors and playwrights 



€fje $0tv=2Dramatic i©riting£ 253 

are treated with more severity than they deserve, 
because of Dunlap's personal dislike. Moreover, 
the author was strongly prejudiced in favor of 
himself. He gave his plays and experiences much 
more prominence than their importance would 
warrant. Indeed, after the first seventy-five pages 
the work becomes more nearly an autobiography 
than a well-balanced history of the stage. While 
other theatres are from time to time considered, 
the overwhelming emphasis is on the New York 
theatre during the period of Dunlap's dramatic 
and managerial activity. We hear more about 
the "author of the Father of an only Child" than 
of all other playwrights combined, and we en- 
counter two chapters of autobiography arbitrarily 
dragged in. 

A third fault is the lack of a clear outline of the 
progress of our drama and the theatre. We are 
given many details in chronological order, but a 
bird's-eye view is hardly to be obtained. 

If the "American Theatre" has numerous short- 
comings, it has more excellences. In general, after 
the first dozen pages the information is reliable. 
Many of the facts recorded are to be met with 
nowhere else, because they came out of the writer's 
own experience, and are invaluable for the light 
they throw on our early stage conditions and 
personages. 

Regarded as an autobiography, the work has 
distinct merit. Dunlap had the good sense to say 
the most about the things he knew best. Thus, we 
get interesting glimpses behind the scenes, ac- 



254 IMliam SDunlap 

counts of the quarrels, trials, and successes of 
actors and managers, pictures of the audiences, 
and descriptions of the players based on close ac- 
quaintance, all of which make it one of the most 
human books ever written on the theatre. In style 
it is more pleasing than any of the later treatises on 
the subject. Personalities, anecdotes, and digres- 
sions serve to enliven a theme which in the hands 
of Ireland and Seilhamer is often dreary reading. 
Dunlap's opinions form no inconsiderable part 
of the volume. His ideals are frankly and forcibly 
stated. Realizing the influence of the theatre, he 
stood unhesitatingly for a moral stage, a stage on 
which virtue should be both practised and taught. 
He stood for a stage which should appeal only to 
the higher intelligence, with none of the cheap at- 
traction of acrobatics, dances, and monsters which 
the audiences of his day demanded. He stood for 
a theatre that should not be the gathering place 
and parade-ground for the vicious and debased 
elements of the community. As the surest means 
to these ends he advocated — and in this he was 
ahead of his countrymen — a theatre owned and 
directed by the government, like those of France 
and Germany, a theatre in which money-making 
and reputation-making should be subordinated to 
the mental and moral improvement of the people. 
Having failed as a manager to bring his ideals to 
a realization because of his dependence on the 
public for his livelihood, Dunlap became convinced 
that only that theatre which was in a position to 
fashion popular taste, instead of following it, 



€ge $tm-2Dtamatic i©riting£ 255 

could effect a permanent reform. Again and 
again he reiterated this idea. Almost the last 
words of the book are: 

"One great theatre in each great city of the 
Union, supported and guided by the state, would 
remedy every evil attendant on our present play- 
house system. 

"We should have no managers seeking only to 
fill the treasury or pay hungry creditors — no stars 
rendering all attraction but that of novelty un- 
profitable^ — no benefit plays tempting actors to 
exceed their stated and certain income, and to 
descend to practices, for the purpose of gaining 
patrons, which tend to disgrace their profession, 
and sometimes end in destroying themselves — no 
display of impudent vice before the stage, or of 
immoral precept upon it. A theatre, so supported 
and conducted, must exhibit plays no less attractive 
for the purpose of mere amusement, and no less 
popular, but like the novels of Walter Scott, and 
James Fennimore Cooper, incomparably more fas- 
cinating as well as instructive, than much of the 
trash of the stage or the circulating library of 
former days." 6 

Subsequent writers on the American theatre 
have drawn copiously from Dunlap as the ultimate 
authority on many points, and all have treated him 
with respect except George O. Seilhamer. By Mr. 
Seilhamer he was arraigned for all the faults he 
possessed and many that he did not, and was found 

6 "American Theatre," pp. 404-5. 



256 ISHHiam SDuniag 

guilty of woeful incapacity for his task. Seilhamer 
was a Philadelphia!!, and one of his indictments 
against Dunlap was that he did not give sufficient 
attention to Philadelphia's laurels. Finding the 
New Yorker in error in some of his early state- 
ments, he eagerly seized the opportunity of con- 
demning him in toto. "Dunlap was so uniformly 
inaccurate that it is impossible to accept anything 
he asserts as a fact." "Dunlap stands pre-eminent 
as a historical blunderer." "There probably never 
was a book written to throw light upon a subject 
that succeeded so completely [as the 'American 
Theatre'] in confusing it." 7 Such is the type of 
Seilhamer's criticism. After castigating Dunlap's 
inaccuracy in this sledge-hammer fashion, he fre- 
quently borrowed extensively from the "blun- 
derer" — without giving credit; or, worse yet, fell 
into as serious error as he had accused his prede- 
cessor of. Seilhamer's "History of the American 
Theatre" is a monument of painstaking investi- 
gation, and its value is great, but the absurdly 
jealous and unscholarly treatment of Dunlap is an 
unmistakable blot. 

Fortunately no one now attaches much weight 
to Seilhamer's abuse, which, by the way, was 
showered on all who had dared to write on his sub- 
ject. It is generally recognized that Dunlap made 
mistakes, partly through oversight, partly through 
the inaccessibility of material that has since been 
obtainable. But present-day students of American 
drama honor him not only as a pioneer in the field 

7 Seilhamer, Vol. I, pp. 198, 286 ; Vol. II, p. 274. 



€lje jpon^SDramatit Wtitmsg 257 

of theatrical chronicling, but as the preserver of 
much information without which our knowledge 
of the subject would be distinctly impoverished. 8 

William Dunlap served the cause of American 
art more effectively with„his pen than his brush; 
the "History of the Rise and Progress of the Arts 
of Design in the United States" is more valuable 
than all his canvases. 

The plan of the work is biographical and strictly 
chronological ; each artist is introduced at the point 
when his professional career began. At the proper 
place we come upon a sixty-nine-page sketch of 
William Dunlap, a garrulous but interesting ac- 
count of his life, with special stress on his artistic 
activities. It was included as a warning against 
neglecting opportunities, and as evidence that he 
was incapable of attaining high rank as a painter. 
Interspersed through the biographies are brief dis- 
quisitions on the art academies of America, and on 
the origin and history of various branches of art, 
together with explanations of the mechanical pro- 
cesses they involve. 

The term "art" is stretched to the breaking point ; 
not only painters, sculptors, and architects, but 
even sign-painters, bank-note engravers, and die- 
sinkers are assembled within these hospitable 
pages. Or if a man, engaged in other pursuits, 



8 The "New York Mirror," Vol. X, p. 266, said that 
Dunlap had in preparation in 1833 a continuation of the 
stage history to the appearance of Edwin Forrest about 
1826. 



258 IMliam 2DunIa$> 

chanced to paint a little, he is to be found here 
with a word on his paintings and a careful discus- 
sion of his non-artistic labors. Thus Robert Ful- 
ton, who made a few poor portraits, is given eleven 
pages, devoted to his steamboat and other inven- 
tions. The boundaries of the United States are 
strained scarcely less. English and French artists, 
who may have visited this country, are treated as 
fully as the natives. For instance, Benjamin 
West's son, Raphael, who spent two years in 
America without doing any professional work, is 
given five pages. 

In dealing with deceased artists, the author went 
to the most available sources for his facts, but in 
the case of a living man his modus operandi was 
to request a biographical account directly from 
him or from some close acquaintance. Frequently 
the letters, with appropriate comments, were pub- 
lished verbatim. In a manner, then, Dunlap's 
function was to act as editor for a large body 
of contributors, among whom were Irving and 
Cooper. This method resulted in a series of biog- 
raphies and autobiographies, which have a first- 
hand veracity and a vitality that give them a 
peculiar worth. 

In the present work Dunlap began at the begin- 
ning. Later investigation has unearthed no Amer- 
ican artist, worthy of the name, prior to John 
Watson, with whose landing at Perth Amboy in 
1 71 5 the chronicle opens. And none of Watson's 
successors down to 1834 was overlooked. No 
practitioner of any of the arts of design was too 



€l)e $om2Dramatic t©ritingg 259 

insignificant to be mentioned. If his merits did 
not warrant a place in the text, his name and dates 
were sure to appear in the appendix, reserved for 
the least important. The work thus has a unique 
value, since it preserves so complete a record of 
our early artists, whose very names in some in- 
stances would otherwise be forgotten. 

The hero of the history is Benjamin West. His 
life, character, and work are admiringly, almost 
reverently, presented, yet with an accuracy which 
has made Dunlap's an authoritative account. 
Throughout the two volumes West's name con- 
stantly appears as the instructor and guide of the 
young artists from America, and as the chief 
honor and glory of contemporary art, both of 
America and England. 

Stuart is handled with less veneration, and the 
weaknesses of his character are exposed; but his 
achievements are lauded without stint. 9 Allston, 
for his success in historical work, which Dunlap 
considered the highest form of painting, is ranked 
as second only to West, and in some ways even his 
superior. Sully, Jarvis, and Morse are cordially 
praised, and in general the author treats his fellow 
artists with kindly respect. 

But when Dunlap wrote the "Arts of Design" 
he was an old and broken man, and he was not 
always free from petulance and irritability. This 
is well illustrated in the passage on Tisdale, 

9 For Volume I of the "National Portrait Gallery" 
Dunlap provided a biography of Stuart, reduced from the 
"Arts of Design." 



260 HSiHiam SDunlap 

whose refusal to give any information about him- 
self provoked this retort : "If, therefore, I err, he 
must excuse me — the world will care nothing 
about it." 10 Dunlap's republicanism grew on him 
with the years, and in this book he took every oc- 
casion to deprecate patronage of art by the nobil- 
ity, and to show his contempt for nobility in 
general. But this spirit of ill-will and vindictive- 
ness was chiefly displayed toward John Trumbull. 
Dunlap hated Trumbull for a variety of reasons. 
That artist, because of a slight misunderstanding, 
had pettishly resigned his commission in the army 
during the Revolution, and withdrawn from the 
conflict. He had seen fit to malign West, whom 
he looked on as his enemy. As president of the 
American Academy he had treated younger artists 
with contempt, and had declared war against the 
National. He received $32,000 from the United 
States government for four poorly executed panels 
in the dome of the capitol. He was domineering, 
vain, mercenary, and pusillanimous — of this there 
is ample proof. For these causes, and perhaps 
others more personal, Dunlap developed a violent 
dislike for Trumbull, to which he did not fail to 
give rein in the "Arts of Design." For his best 
work he had nothing but praise, yet it was his 
poorer work and his faults of character and con- 
duct that he chose to dwell on. He magnified 
trifles, misconstrued motives, and in general made 
Trumbull out a much worse person than he really 
was. If West may be called the hero of the his- 
tory, surely Trumbull is the villain. 
10 Vol. II, p. 45- 



€t)e $on^2Dramatic i©riting£ 2 6 1 

Another shortcoming somewhat akin to this 
show of personal animosity, is the preponderance 
of mere gossip and scandal throughout. The bio- 
graphical plan was adopted because it admitted of 
this sort of diversion, which it was thought would 
lend popular interest to the subject. Dunlap said: 
"I believe the public love anecdote and gossip — 
that I do, I am quite certain." 11 But anecdote and 
gossip proved so attractive to him that he forgot 
his duty as a historian. We look in vain for an 
estimate of an artist's place in the development of 
American art. We hear almost nothing of influ- 
ences, and nothing at all of schools. The artists 
are not even catalogued according to branches. An 
engraver may be found sandwiched between a 
painter and an architect. The work sadly lacks 
organization, arrangement, and proportion, and 
consequently fails to give a perceptible outline of 
the "rise and progress of the arts of design in the 
United States." But, like the "American Theatre," 
it has, in spite of its faults, a place all its own as 
the repository of much that would otherwise be 
lost. 

The style of this, Dunlap's most elaborate and 
pretentious product, is appropriately elaborate and 
pretentious. It was written in an era when Amer- 
ican writers were still addicted to the heavy, pom- 
pous periods of the eighteenth century, and it 
partook of the mannerisms of its age. The stylistic 
qualities which distinguish all Dunlap's books are 
here intensified. In striving for pregnancy and 
weight he was sometimes reduced to making much 

11 "New York Mirror," Vol. XI, p. 248. 



262 iBffliam SDunia$> 

of little, with a resultant tone of insincerity and 
affectation. There is too much fondness for the 
first person singular, which at times is not to be 
distinguished from boasting; yet this, like his 
wordy discursiveness, is not unpardonable in a 
man of his years. On the other hand, Dunlap's 
style often possesses an expressiveness, a smooth- 
ness, and an animation which go far toward aton- 
ing for its imperfections. 

Most of our author's books were greeted by the 
reviewers with amiable commonplaces, which I 
have not felt it worth while to quote. But the 
"Arts of Design" had a varied and interesting re- 
ception. The "Mirror," cordial as always, recom- 
mended the volumes to all, from the scholar to the 
conquest-sated belle, and predicted for it a sensa- 
tion across the water. 12 The "American Quar- 
terly Review" of Philadelphia complimented the 
writer's industry, but aptly suggested that the title 
be changed to "Anecdotes of Painters, Sculptors, 
Architects, and Engravers, and of any and every 
body who has had the remotest connection with 
the Arts of Design in the United States." It con- 
tinued : "There is little of the dignity of history in 
its gossiping chapters, and much more information 
is communicated about the men than the artists. 
. . . The original critical portions are for the most 
part meagre and unsatisfactory." 13 The "North 
American Review" praised the minuteness of the 
research, the ease and clearness of the style, and 

12 Vol. XII, pp. 139, 199. 

13 Vol. XVII, pp. 143 ff. 



€lje$on-SDramaticI©ritmg£ 263 

the candor of the judgments, but found a lack of 
arrangement, selection, and compression in the 
material, and a partiality and animosity toward 
some artists. It considered the attacks on Trum- 
bull unjust, and the temper displayed not becoming 
to a sensible man. 14 

The "American Monthly Magazine" stoutly 
championed Trumbull, and took the first oppor- 
tunity to abuse Dunlap as an artist. When his 
painting, "Richard and Kenneth," appeared at the 
tenth exhibition of the National Academy, the 
magazine dipped its pen in vitriol, and incon- 
tinently damned this "daub equally void of draw- 
ing, taste or effect." Why did the Academy permit 
such an atrocity to blot its walls? It might have 
been done as well by a boy of fourteen ! An artist 
who had so bitterly condemned his superiors, it 
was asserted, could not complain if he was sub- 
jected to a little impartial criticism. 15 But the 
most violent denunciation came from an anony- 
mous writer, who, having contributed the sketch 
of John Vanderlyn to the "Arts of Design," felt 
himself and the painter so wronged by the changes 
that Dunlap made, that he published a pamphlet 
in defense of his friend and in condemnation of 
the unlucky historian. With such utterances as 
these did he vent his wrath : 

"Indeed, sir, your two bulky tomes of a thou- 
sand pages, dignified by the pompous title of a 



" Vol. XLI, pp. 146 ff. 
15 Vol. V, p. 316. 



264 !©HIiam SDunlap 

'History'; — what are they but a miserable chron- 
icle of mere gossip and scandal, about upon a par 
with our daily political press or police reports. 
... As an Artist, and certainly not of the first 
class, you assume a dictation over all of your pro- 
fession. . . . The grave even, it seems, has proved 
no shelter to many of them, for you have dragged 
them, or their memoirs, before the public, but as I 
hope not before posterity — to degrade them of 
course, and at the same time, as certainly your 
common profession." 16 

As a final verdict on the whole matter I quote 
the opinion of a modern student of American art. 
Of Dunlap, Mr. Samuel Isham has said: 

"He is our American Vasari. . . . He had a 
feeling for accuracy rare at the time. . . . He has 
been called 'the acrimonious Dunlap/ but the 
reader of to-day will not find the epithet justified. 
... It is only in his pages that we seem to touch 
the reality of West and Stuart and Trumbull and 
Allston and Sully. Men were as sensitive then as 
to-day, and the men of whom he wrote and their 
friends were displeased at his frankness; but 
viewed at the present distance of time, he seems 
rather kindly. He had his dislikes, but he was 
harder on no one than on himself." 17 

16 "Review of the 'Biographical Sketch' of John Van- 
derlyn, published by William Dunlap, in his 'History of 
the Arts of Design,' with Some Additional Notices, re- 
specting Mr. Vanderlyn, As an Artist." By a Friend of 
the Artist. New York, 1838, p. 62. 

17 "History of American Painting," pp. 72-3. 



€J|e $om2Dramatic I©riting£ 265 

The closing period of Dunlap's life was occupied 
with research in the history of his State. This 
subject had of recent years received considerable 
attention, and a half-dozen histories of New York, 
written between 1814 and 1835, were in the field. 
For his authorities, Dunlap employed his pre- 
cursors to some extent, but for the most part he 
went to the sources, and minutely examined news- 
papers, state and private documents, letters, jour- 
nals, etc. 

When the pinch of poverty became so sharp as 
to require immediate alleviation, he whipped into 
shape the material he already had, and in 1837 
published his "History of New York, for Schools." 
His model was "Uncle Philip's Conversations with 
the Children about New York," written by F. L. 
Hawks and printed in 1835, — a book in which in- 
struction is imparted by the question and answer 
method. Uncle Philip's chats ceased with the 
Declaration of Independence, and Dunlap con- 
tinued the task. The interlocutors are supposed 
to be Uncle Betterworth, aged seventy-one, who is 
engaged in writing a history of the State, and bears 
a striking resemblance to William Dunlap; and 
four children between the ages of eight and four- 
teen. John, the oldest, shows a perfect genius for 
remembering dates and facts; William, aged 
twelve, speaks with the vocabulary of fifty; 
Philip's function is to shout "Hurrah!" in the 
heroic moments, and Mary is frankly bored when 
Indians are not the theme. 

Before considering the war, Uncle Betterworth 



266 ISKQiam SDunlap 

questions the children on what they had learned 
from Uncle Philip, and thus the early history from 
Hudson's discovery is presented. After the first 
hundred pages the causes of the Revolution are 
taken up and discussed during the remainder of 
the volume. At this point the material becomes too 
complex and the style too weighty for juvenile 
minds. Volume II deals with the Revolution, and 
ends with the inauguration of Washington in 
1789. Both parts, like Hawks's book, are well 
sprinkled with stories and moral disquisitions on 
the evils of drinking, smoking, idleness, etc. 

An examination of this work in connection with 
the larger history, which followed it in two or 
three years, shows that in the main both came from 
the same manuscript. The text-book is independ- 
ent through the first half of Volume I, but begin- 
ning with the causes of the Revolution, it contains 
almost nothing not found in the same words in 
the later and more amplified treatise. The situa- 
tion is probably this: Up to 1837 Dunlap had car- 
ried on his research and written portions ir the 
final form, with only the larger history in mind. 
Then being too impoverished to continue, he filled 
the gaps in his manuscript in a more juvenile style, 
and with slight revision sent it to press. Later in- 
vestigation was given to the early periods and to 
certain phases of the Revolution, which had not as 
yet been thoroughly worked out, and the results 
were incorporated in the second publication. 

The first part of the "History of the New Neth- 
erlands, Province of New York, and State of New 



€lje IJon^Dr amatic Wtitm$$ 267 

York, to the Adoption of the Federal Constitu- 
tion," appeared in 1839. Beginning with the dis- 
covery of America, it proceeds with much detail 
through Hudson's exploration and the Dutch and 
English colonization. The last quarter of the vol- 
ume deals with the causes of the war, and prac- 
tically parallels the text-book. The second part 
was published posthumously in 1840, with a pref- 
ace stating that while Volume I was in the press, 
the author had been stricken with a disease which 
ultimately proved fatal, and that the material of 
the present volume had been selected and arranged 
according to the design of the writer in so far as it 
had been expressed. I infer that John A. Dunlap 
was the editor from the facts that the copyright 
was secured by him, and that he assisted his father 
in other literary labors. The second volume details 
the events of the Revolution, with undue stress on 
the Arnold-Andre conspiracy, and concludes with 
the adoption of the Federal Constitution, an out- 
line >f which is given. An appendix of two hun- 
dred and forty-six pages follows, containing 
letters, documents, extracts from early records, 
and a large quantity of "Miscellaneous Matter" 
apparently drawn from the newspapers. 

If Dunlap's work be compared with a good 
modern history of the State, it will be seen that 
very little escaped him and that his statements are 
generally accurate. As an investigator he pos- 
sessed distinct ability; to his task he brought a 
perseverance and a minuteness of research not 
often to be found in an old and broken man. But 
perhaps this is the highest praise his last achieve- 



268 IBiHiam SDunlaji 

ment can be given. As a treatise on New York 
history it leaves much to be desired. It is scarcely 
more than a series of details chronologically ar- 
ranged, and presented in an impersonal and inef- 
fective manner. There is no proper proportion or 
emphasis. There is no subordination of the unim- 
portant, nor stressing of the significant; conse- 
quently the book gives no clear idea of the main 
current of events. Indian affairs, biography of 
both the small and the great, episodes involving 
oppression or the struggle against it, dramatic or 
picturesque occurrences, — these are disproportion- 
ately prominent because they were Dunlap's hob- 
bies. A defect resulting from all this is that we 
gain no large view of the development of New 
York, no connected idea of her progress as a politi- 
cal unit, or of her contribution to the history of the 
nation. In other words, Dunlap was so absorbed in 
the contemplation of the trees that he failed to per- 
ceive the forest. Had he lived to complete the 
second volume, he might have remedied this fault 
to some extent, but probably not, for the fault 
seems to have been constitutional. In connection 
with his Napoleonic fragments, his chronicles of 
the theatre and art, and even his large paintings, 
we have noticed the same inability to convert a 
mass of details into a progressive unit. 

The worth of the book as a historic document is 
not a little lessened by the decidedly partisan spirit 
displayed. As a Federalist Dunlap could not for- 
get his antipathy to France, nor his conviction that 
unqualified suffrage was a very dangerous liberty. 



€lje l^on^SDramatic l©riting£ 269 

As an American he could not forget his enmity for 
England, nor lose a chance to cast aspersions at 
her. 

But defective though it is, the history deserves 
as much respect as any book of its time because of 
the overwhelming obstacles with which the author 
had to contend. Poverty, old age, and disease op- 
posed him at every step, yet he did not give up the 
struggle until his hands and mind were powerless ; 
and when the second volume appeared, a few 
months after his death, his triumph was complete. 
Perhaps it is as an example of dogged persever- 
ance and unspectacular heroism that the "History 
of New York" has its greatest value. 



Ill 

It would have been strange if the energetic, ver- 
satile, and improvident Dunlap had not tried to 
establish a magazine, inasmuch as that occupation 
was then one of the popular modes of losing 
money. Since the founding of our first magazine 
at Philadelphia, in 1741, the country had seen mul- 
tiplied dozens of the species rise, flourish for a day, 
and wither. The eighteenth century alone wit- 
nessed the outcropping of no less than fifty-seven 
of these journalistic mushrooms, most of which 
expired within a year, though two, the "New York 
Magazine; or, Literary Repository" and the 
"Massachusetts Magazine," achieved a veritable 



2 jo IMIiam SDunlap 

Methuselah existence of eight years each. 18 The 
early years of the nineteenth century had their 
quota of these ill-fated enterprises. One, however, 
the "Port Folio," founded at Philadelphia in 1801 
under the editorship of Joseph Dennie, attained 
the altogether unprecedented age of twenty-six 
years before it was laid in the ancestral tomb. 

The modern monthly bears very little resem- 
blance to its progenitors. These pioneers had 
almost no illustrations or advertisements. Their 
pages were filled with a variety of material cal- 
culated to hit divers tastes. A periodical of the 
better class, such as Charles Brockden Brown's 
"Monthly Magazine, and American Review," con- 
tained biographical sketches, travel papers, essays 
on superficial subjects, accounts of remarkable 
sights, events, etc., occasional tales, reviews of 
books and plays, household information, foreign 
and domestic occurrences, extracts from European 
periodicals, and a section devoted to poetry. The 
intellectual challenge was not great; the aim was 
to impart polite instruction and correct sentiments. 

Dunlap established the "Monthly Recorder" in 
April, 181 3. Just why he should have tried to re- 
plenish his depleted finances by entering the pre- 
carious field of journalism in the midst of the war, 
it would be difficult to explain, except that he had 
a gift for tumbling down financial stairways. Per- 
haps Dennie's comparative success inspired him; 
but if so, it was a will-o'-the-wisp inspiration, for 

18 P. L. Ford, "Check-list of Eighteenth Century Pe- 
riodicals." 



€fje |5omSDramatic J©riting£ 2 7 1 

after five issues the "Monthly Recorder" fell into 
the bog of unpaid and insufficient subscriptions, 
which had swamped the goodly throng of its 
predecessors. 

But the "Monthly Recorder," albeit its existence 
was of most uncomplimentary brevity, was as 
meritorious as the most of its kind. Its contents 
had as much dignity and solidity as any of its con- 
temporaries. A synopsis of the April number will 
indicate the character of all. The issue opened 
with a biography of Dr. Edward Miller, whose 
portrait, engraved from a painting by Dunlap, 
served as frontispiece. There followed the first 
instalment of a letter-series, "The American in 
Europe"; an extract on eccentric character from 
Angeloni's letters; an essay contrasting supersti- 
tion and religion; two letters on the theatre 
written in the Jonathan Oldstyle manner by "Tim- 
othy Teasdale"; a story of the Inquisition; an 
article on Leslie, the painter; a memorandum of 
the wars between the present United States and 
Canada, by S. L. Mitchill ; a biographical notice of 
William Clifton; a fine arts section, containing an 
account of the American Academy, by the secre- 
tary; book reviews; notices of new publications; 
a dramatic review; a digest of public events; and 
a few scattered poems. 

It was then the modest custom to publish maga- 
zine articles anonymously ; hence it is impossible to 
say just how much of the contents of the five 
numbers came from Dunlap's pen, or who his con- 
tributors were. But it is easy to see the editor's 



272 J©aiiam 2DunI ap 

hand frequently, for instance in the biography of 
Miller, the Inquisition tale, and the article on 
Leslie in the April issue. As for the contributors, 
we know at least that Mitchill was one, and that 
John Dunlap assisted in the undertaking. 19 

Dunlap's journalistic activities were not confined 
to the editing of a short-lived magazine. He was 
also a prolific writer for the New York period- 
icals. The extent of his work in this direction 
cannot be ascertained because of the practice of 
anonymity already referred to. Yet some of his 
articles were signed, and to others he alluded in 
his Diary, so that I have been able to locate about 
nineteen contributions to magazines and newspa- 
pers. These represent various types of composi- 
tion, — translation, philosophy, biography, criticism, 
and story ; and some are of sufficient interest to be 
summarized here. 

The earliest article which I have found dates 
from the period of Godwinian influence. It ap- 
peared in the "New York Magazine; or, Literary 
Repository" of October, 1797, under the heading 
"On Innocence and Generosity." It was written 
in answer to St. Pierre's "Vindication of Divine 
Providence," which had praised innocence as the 
most desirable of qualities. Dunlap declared a 
consciousness of virtue to be preferable to that of 
innocence, inasmuch as the former implies active 
ability for good, while the latter may imply only 
an absence of vice. "The most innocent of all ani- 
19 "Arts of Design," Vol. I, p. 272. 



€tp l^omSDcamatic J©riting£ 2 73 

mals," said he, "is an oyster." St. Pierre had also 
expressed the sentimentalist's belief that gener- 
osity and feeling rather than reason should be the 
guide of life. In reply Dunlap said : 

"These opinions are mischievous in the same de- 
gree that they are unphilosophic and unjust. Let 
man be just and he will never be generous ; for the 
moment that, deaf to reason, and impelled by feel- 
ing, he oversteps the bounds of justice, he has done 
a wrong, he has committed injustice, he has in- 
jured a fellow-creature, and inflicted a wound on 
society." 

In the next issue of the same periodical, Dunlap 
a second time attacked St. Pierre. The French 
writer had argued for an unreasoning love of coun- 
try simply because it is one's own. The American 
contended that love of country should be based 
solely on the worth of the country; that blind 
patriotism is a frequent cause of stagnation, and 
a sure breeder of injustice. Obviously Dunlap had 
drunk deep at the Godwinian well. 

The "Mirror" of September 14, 1833, contained 
a review of Croker's edition of Boswell's "Life 
of Johnson." In the manner of the contemporary 
English reviews, the writer expressed his opinions 
on the subject of the book rather than on the book 
itself. Dunlap was no admirer of Johnson, the 
philosopher. He considered his teaching danger- 
ously immoral and a deliberate perversion of the 
truth. Johnson's declaration, "It is better that 
some be unhappy than that none should be happy ; 



2 74 l©tfiiam 2DunIap 

which would be the case in a general state of equal- 
ity," roused the republican's ire. In other words, 
said Dunlap, "it is better that the mass of man- 
kind should be poor and oppressed, vicious and un- 
happy . . . because, otherwise, the great could not 
revel in that superfluity which constitutes happi- 
ness." Equality, he maintained, far from destroy- 
ing happiness, would increase it by doing away 
with ignorance and vice. "How is it," said John- 
son, "that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty 
among the drivers of negroes ?" Dunlap answered 
that the loud yelps came from those upon whom 
England had forced negro slavery, and that the 
yelpers were those who were striving to abolish 
the evil after having shaken off the chains of 
foreign dominance, which Johnson would have 
riveted on them. While admiring the lexicog- 
rapher's powers of mind, the writer considered 
his political and moral doctrines perniciously false. 

An essay on art, which Dunlap had read before 
the New York Lyceum, was published in the 
"American Monthly Magazine" of February, 1836. 
He stated the principle that art is a product of 
national and individual independence, and that 
artists must be left free to direct their own insti- 
tutions if they are to succeed. (The old quarrel 
between the two academies had not been for- 
gotten.) To those men of wealth who tried to 
run the academies, he recommended that they 
could better serve the cause by purchasing foreign 
masterpieces and establishing museums. 

Nothing that Dunlap ever wrote is more read- 






€i$z ®on^2Pramatic »£riting£ 275 

able than two picaresque tales, published in the 
"Mirror" of November 12, 1836, and January 7, 
1837. They deal with a pre-Revolutionary rogue, 
Tom Bell, who was extraordinarily ingenious at 
parting the fool and his money. He also had the 
faculty of escaping with the ill-gotten gains, leav- 
ing his accomplices to pay the penalty. Both tales 
are told with sprightliness and animation, and one 
could desire further exploits of the entertainingly 
iniquitous Tom Bell. 



IV 

Dunlap lived in an age when drinking was almost 
a universal practice, and when drunkenness was 
much more common among people of respectability 
than it is to-day. He himself, while not all his life 
a total abstainer, was always very moderate in his 
potations, unless it might have been during his 
residence in England. The extent of his temper- 
ance is well illustrated by an incident which oc- 
curred at a banquet given in honor of Cooke. A 
decanter was upset on the table, and the wine 
running from Cooke toward Dunlap, the actor ex- 
claimed, "See! is it not very strange? The wine 
runs from me! and toward that man, too, of all 
others." 

Dunlap replied, "Do you not know the reason ?" 

"No— what is it?" 

"I never abuse it." 20 

20 "Memoirs of Cooke," Vol. II, p. 318. 



2 76 iBttliam 2Duniap 

By personal experience Dunlap found that alco- 
hol was not essential, by observation he became 
convinced that it was dangerous, and eventually he 
developed into a temperance advocate. To propa- 
gate his views, at the age of seventy he published 
a novel called "Thirty Years Ago; or, The Mem- 
oirs of a Water Drinker." 

The incidents center about the Park Theatre of 
New York, a rather unexpected haunt for a tee- 
totaler. The abstemious hero is a comedian, 
blest with the name of Zebediah Spiffard, whose 
diminutive body is topped off with a face of ex- 
ceeding homeliness and a shock of orange-red hair, 
— truly a novel hero for a novel. Zebediah as a 
boy became a confirmed and unshakable water- 
drinker because of the fatal inebriety of his 
mother. At the opening of the story the comedian 
has just married, on brief acquaintance and for 
reasons not specified, a tall and stately tragedienne, 
both larger and older than himself, and of none 
too savory a reputation. Poor Spiffard soon learns 
to his unutterable woe that his wife and mother- 
in-law are also slaves of the bottle. (Dunlap ap- 
parently believed in woman's rights.) 

The heroine, Emma Portland, a cousin of Mrs. 
Spiffard's, is one of those transcendingly beauti- 
ful maidens whom novelists have ever loved to 
create. Her angelic face is crowned by a pro- 
fusion of flowing tresses that are forever escap- 
ing from confinement and falling in cascades about 
her lovely form. Her mind is pure and unsullied 
as a lily, and her days are spent in charitable deeds. 



€l)e $om2Dramatic Wtitin$$ 277 

Her fiance (for in this curious book the hero and 
heroine have no designs on each other) is Henry 
Johnson, a poor but sterling youth with a sick 
mother to care for. 

The lesson of temperance is powerfully enforced 
by the drunken exploits of Cooke, who is one 
of the leading characters of the tale. One night 
the actor is found dead drunk in the snow, and 
being carried to Henry's home, is recognized by 
Mrs. Johnson as her one-time husband and the 
father of her son. 21 

In the closing chapters Mrs. Spiffard, who has 
gone from bad to worse, commits suicide, a de- 
bauched aunt of Zebediah's dies of alcoholism, and 
Cooke is borne to a drunkard's grave. The 
comedian now turns preacher and devotes him- 
self to organizing temperance- societies; while 
Henry and Emma receive the reward of virtue, 
and are happily married. 

The novel is Dunlap's least praiseworthy book. 
It is without plot or definite structure, and the 
content is often ludicrous. The strained and ex- 
aggerated language, the featuring of trifling epi- 
sodes, the over-wrought sentimentality, the un- 
naturalness of the characters, the shallow and 
crudely enforced moralizing, and the multiplied 
horrors of strong drink cause the "Water Drinker" 
to rank as an inferior specimen of Sunday-school 
fiction. 

21 Dunlap admitted that there was no basis in reality 
for assuming this marriage, but it was in keeping with 
Cooke's marital record. 



278 iBilliam SDunlap 

But a certain amount of interest must be con- 
ceded it. There are hints of the appearance and 
customs of old New York, glimpses behind the 
scenes at the Park Theatre, and side-lights on 
Cooke, all of which are worth reading, though not 
of especial value. The book is chiefly interesting 
for the way in which the author has utilized his 
acquaintanceship and his experiences for the mak- 
ing of a story. Besides Cooke, a half-dozen other 
real people, including T. A. Cooper, Drs. Francis 
and McLean, and Governor Tompkins, are intro- 
duced by name; and two or three more are pre- 
sented under a disguise. The portrait of the re- 
doubtable Zebediah himself was unquestionably 
drawn from William Twaits, the comedian; and 
Treadwell, in whose law office Spiff ard at one time 
studied, bears a striking resemblance to Robert 
Treat Paine, Jr. 

As for the incidents, at least half of them are to 
be found in essence in the "Memoirs of Cooke," 
the "American Theatre," and the Diary. Several 
elements in Zebediah 's youth are autobiographical, 
for instance the favorite books, the trip to Ox- 
ford and Stamford, and the visit to the battle-field 
of Quebec, where an ancestor had bled. There is 
an elaborate hoax played on the comedian by his 
professional friends, which is recorded in the 
"American Theatre," with Twaits as the victim. 
There is a fake duel between Cooper and Cooke, 
elaborated from the "Memoirs." There is an ex- 
cursion to a mad-house, extracted almost bodily 
from Volume XXX of the Diary. Were it worth 



€lje $on^HDramatic 3Briting£ 2 79 

while, numerous other instances of the same thing 
might be cited. 

In some sense the book is an epitome of Dun- 
lap's mind. None of his favorite interests or 
opinions is omitted. The theatre and its need of 
reform and government control, art, George Wash- 
ington, Yankee and Irish servants, sentimentalism, 
moralizing, hatred of slavery and belief in coloni- 
zation, contempt for English snobbery, suspicion 
of France, — such are the warp and woof of the 
novel as they were of its author's mental fabric. 
Even the geography of the book is typical, em- 
bracing as it does Stamford and Virginia, the ex- 
tremes of Dunlap's peregrinations. 

With all its imperfections, the "Water Drinker" 
was well received and warmly reviewed. To a 
modern reader it is merely a curiosity, deserving 
of respect as a serious effort to promote temper- 
ance when temperance was unpopular, but devoid 
of merit as a piece of literature. 

There were few kinds of writing that Dunlap did 
not attempt. His non-dramatic works testify to 
an unflagging energy and a variety of interests that 
would be creditable to any one, and especially so 
to a man who had gained prominence in other lines 
of endeavor as well. These works have striking 
defects and some are almost worthless, yet a few 
are of such importance as to hold a unique posi- 
tion in their respective fields. 



CHAPTER VI 
Conclusion 

WILLIAM DUNLAP has never ranked 
among our distinguished men of letters, 
and he will never do so. He labored as zealously 
as any, but no amount of application could make 
up for the gift that he lacked. He challenges our 
interest almost wholly as a pioneer. He took up 
his pen when the literature of the United States 
was still feeble and ill-supported. He threw him- 
self especially into the neglected and unremunera- 
tive field of American drama, and though he pro- 
duced nothing of lasting merit, he surpassed the 
work of his forerunners, he established play-writ- 
ing as a respectable profession, he stimulated 
others to follow his example, and he exerted a 
distinct influence in determining the course of our 
drama during the last years of the eighteenth 
century, — not by his original conceptions, to be 
sure, but by imitating English types. 

As manager of the New York theatre, he was 
able to bring his innovations before the public, and 
to hasten their adoption by his contemporaries. 
This position also enabled him to gain a hearing 
for other native dramatists, and thus to encourage 
further activity in the same direction. He per- 
formed an additional service of real importance 
by translating and staging a large number of 
280 



Conclusion 281 

French and German plays, Hitherto American 
theatre-goers had been almost totally ignorant of 
foreign drama except that of England, but Dun- 
lap gave prominence to other countries as well, 
and so helped broaden the outlook of our citizens 
on the literature of the world. 

Upon the theatre as an institution his effect was 
less marked. Yet he emphasized scenery more 
than had been done before, and he made the play- 
house as moral and intellectual as his patrons 
would permit. 

But Dunlap's achievements were by no means 
confined to the theatre. His non-dramatic writ- 
ings were numerous; and indeed his present-day 
value rests on some of these, rather than on his 
plays. As the biographer of George Frederick 
Cooke and Charles Brockden Brown, and as the 
historian of the American stage and American art, 
though sometimes prone to error, he recorded a 
large quantity of information that could have come 
from no one else, and that greatly enriches our 
knowledge of those subjects to-day. 

Still another prominent line of Dunlap's en- 
deavor was painting. The making of miniatures, 
oil portraits, and exhibition pictures occupied a 
considerable portion of his life. His exhibition 
pictures seem to have perished, with no attendant 
loss to art, but the miniatures and portraits which 
remain indicate that at his best he was a thor- 
oughly capable painter. But in this field again 
Dunlap's place is primarily that of a pioneer. He 
was one of the early New Yorkers to take up 



282 3©iIIiam SDunlap 

painting as a profession, he was a founder of the 
first art academy in New York worthy of the 
name, and he was in some sense a missionary of 
art to the more remote communities by virtue both 
of his itinerant occupation and of his traveling 
show pictures. 

As a workman, Dunlap belongs to what Charles 
Lamb has called the great race — the borrowers. 
Having a good deal of constructive skill but no 
imagination, he drew his material from the most 
available sources. In his painting he borrowed 
wholesale from Benjamin West. In his plays he 
borrowed from Shakespeare, Dekker, and the 
English writers of his own day, from novels, news- 
papers, and history. In his translations, them- 
selves a species of borrowing, he borrowed from 
anybody who had already adapted the same pieces. 

But by means of his borrowing Dunlap aided the 
progress of American culture. Before the new 
and uncertain nation could develop any sort of 
culture of its own, it must first acquire a sense of 
culture and a desire for it, and this could most 
readily be brought about through a familiarity with 
the culture of the Old World. By helping, 
through his imitations and borrowings, to gain cur- 
rency in the United States for the art and litera- 
ture of Europe, he made a small but definite con- 
tribution to the intellectual growth of the young 
nation. 

In a survey of Dunlap's work, two facts stand 
out most clearly. In the first place, he was un- 
usually prolific and surprisingly versatile. And 






Conclusion 28 



o 



in each department of his activity, while producing 
much that was decidedly bad, he also produced 
some results that were more than ordinarily good, 
considering his period. Second, whether his out- 
put was good or bad, his labor was prompted by 
motives which deserve complete respect. He lived 
at a time when American art and literature were 
compelled to struggle for existence, with no 
popular encouragement and support. Yet he was 
convinced that art and literature were of more 
value than dollars and cents. He allied himself 
with the exponents of these pursuits ; and through- 
out a long life, marked often by severe poverty and 
distress, he remained faithful to the cause which 
he had espoused. 



List of William J^xmlap'ss mrtttngjs 

Original Dramatic Works 

i "The Modest Soldier ; or, Love in New York." 
Written 1787. 

2 "The Father; or, American Shandyism." 

Played at the John Street Theatre, New York, 
September 7, 1789. 

Printed at New York, September 14, 1789. Re- 
printed at Halifax immediately. Also in the 
"Massachusetts Magazine; or, Monthly Mu- 
seum/' October and November, 1789, Vol. I, 
pp. 620-29, 649-55. Revised as 

"The Father of an Only Child." 

Printed in the "Dramatic Works of William 
Dunlap," Vol. I, Philadelphia, 1806. 
Copies of this volume were broken up by David 
Longworth, and each play was issued sepa- 
rately with an additional title-page, New York, 
1807. This volume was reissued aa Vol. XXII 
of Longworth's "English and American 
Stage," New York, 1808. 

The edition of 1789 was reprinted as No. 2 of 
the Publications of the Dunlap Society, New 
York, 1887. 

1 For a complete title-page bibliography of Dunlap, see 
Oscar Wegelin, "A Bibliographical Checklist of the Plays 
and Miscellaneous Writings of William Dunlap.'' In 
"Bibliographica Americana," edited by Charles F. Heart- 
man. Vol. I, New York, 1916. 
284 



i©iHiam SDmtfap'g Wtttin$$ 285 

"Darby's Return." 

Played at the John Street Theatre, New York, 
November 24, 1789. 

Printed at New York, December, 1789. Re- 
printed in the "New York Magazine; or, Lit- 
erary Repository," January, 1790, Vol. I, pp. 
47-51. Also at Philadelphia, 1791. In the 
"Dramatic Works of William Dunlap," Vol. I, 
Philadelphia, 1806. Reissued by Longworth in 
1807 and 1808 as was "The Father/' In second 
series No. 8 of the Publications of the Dunlap 
Society, New York, 1899, Appendix. 

"The Miser's Wedding." Sometimes called 
"The Wedding." 

Played at the John Street Theatre, New York, 
June, 1793. 

"The Fatal Deception; or, The Progress of 
Guilt." 

Played at the John Street Theatre, New York, 
April 24, 1794. 
Printed as 

"Leicester." 

In the "Dramatic Works of William Dunlap," 
Vol. I, Philadelphia, 1806. Reissued by Long- 
worth in 1807 and 1808 as was "The Father." 

"Shelty's Travels." 

Played at the John Street Theatre, New York, 
April 24, 1794. 

"Fontainville Abbey." 

Played at the John Street Theatre, New York, 
February 17, 1795. 

Epilogue printed in the "New York Magazine ; 
or, Literary Repository," May, 1795, Vol. VI, 



286 J©iHiam SDunlap 

p. 183. The play printed in the "Dramatic 
Works of William Dunlap," Vol. I, Philadel- 
phia, 1806. Reissued by Longworth in 1807 
and 1808 as was "The Father." 

8 "The Archers; or, Mountaineers of Switzer- 
land." Sometimes called "William Tell; or, 
The Archers." 

Played at the John Street Theatre, New York, 

April 18, 1796. 

Printed at New York, 1796. 

9 "The Mysterious Monk." 

Played at the John Street Theatre, New York, 
October 31, 1796. 
Printed as 

"Ribbemont; or, The Feudal Baron." 

New York, 1803. In Longworth's "English 
and American Stage," Vol. I, New York, 
1803 (?). 

10 "The Knight's Adventure." 

Revised by John Hodgkinson as 
"The Man of Fortitude; or, The Knight's Ad- 
venture." 

Played at the John Street Theatre, New York, 
June 7, 1797. 

Printed at New York, 1807. The title-page 
bears only Hodgkinson's name. 

11 "Andre." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, March 
30, 1798. 

Printed at New York, 1798. London, 1799. 
The edition of 1798 was reprinted as No. 4 of 
the Publications of the Dunlap Society, New 



J©illiam SDunlajfg Wtitm$$ 287 

York, 1887. Also in "Representative Ameri- 
can Plays," edited by Arthur Hobson Quinn, 
New York, 1917. 

12 "Sterne's Maria; or, The Vintage." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Janu- 
ary 14, 1799. 

13 "The Natural Daughter." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Feb- 
ruary 8, 1799. 

14 "The Temple of Independence." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Feb- 
ruary 22, 1799. 

15 "The Italian Father." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, April 
15, 1799. 

Printed at New York, 1810. In "Dramatic 
Works of William Dunlap," Vol. II, New 
York, 1816. 

16 "The Knight of Guadalquiver." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, De- 
cember 5, 1800. 

17 "The Soldier of , 76." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Feb- 
ruary 23, 1801. 

18 "The Retrospect; or, The American Revolu- 
tion." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, July 
5, 1802. 

19 "Liberal Opinions." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Janu- 
ary, 1803. 



288 JMIiam 2DunIa$> 

20 "The Glory of Columbia — Her Yeomanry !" 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, July 
4, 1803. 

"The Songs, Duets, and Chorusses," printed at 
New York, 1803. Also in Longworth's "Eng- 
lish and American Stage," Vol. XV, New 
York, c. 1806. 
The play printed at New York, 181 7. 

21 "Bonaparte in England." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, De- 
cember 19, 1803. 

22 "The Proverb; or, Conceit Can Cure; Con- 
ceit Can Kill." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Feb- 
ruary 20, 1804. 

23 "Lewis of Monte Blanco; or, The Trans- 

planted Irishman." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, March 
12, 1804. 

24 "The Freedom of the Seas." A song. 

Sung at the Park Theatre, New York, July 4, 

1810. 

Printed in the "New York Evening Post," 

July 3 and 5, 1810. Also with "Yankee 

Chronology; or, Huzza for the Constitution!" 

New York, 1812. 

25 "Yankee Chronology." A song. 

Sung at the Park Theatre, New York, July 4, 

1812. 

Augmented into an interlude, 

"Yankee Chronology ; or, Huzza for the Con- 
stitution !" 



IMIiam 3DunIap'£ ffltitm$$ 289 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Sep- 
tember 7, 1812. 
Printed at New York, 1812. 

26 "Yankee Tars." A song. 

Sung at the Park Theatre, New York, Decem- 
ber 10, 1812. 

Printed with "Yankee Chronology; or, Huzza 
for the Constitution!" New York, 1812. 

27 "The Battle of New Orleans." 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, July 
4,1816 (?). 

28 "The Flying Dutchman." 

Played at the Bowery Theatre, New York, 
May 25, 1827. 

29 "A Trip to Niagara; or, Travellers in Amer- 
ica." 

Played at the Bowery Theatre, New York, 
November 28, 1828. 
Printed at New York, 1830. 

30 "Forty and Twenty." Original or translated ? 

Unacted. 

31 "Robespierre." Original or translated? 

Unacted. 

Dramatic Translations 
a. From the French 
1 "Tell Truth and Shame the Devil." (Robi- 
neau.) 

Played at the John Street Theatre, New York, 

January 9, 1797. 

Printed at New York, 1797. 



2 90 iDrtiiam SDunlap 

2 "The School for Soldiers." (Mercier.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, July 
4, 1799. 

3 "The Robbery." (Monvel.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, De- 
cember 30, 1799. 

4 "Abbe de l'£pee." (Bouilly.) 

Plaved at the Park Theatre, New York, March 
8, 1801. 

5 "The Merry Gardener." (Author unknown.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Feb- 
ruary 3, 1802. 

6 "The Voice of Nature." (Caigniez.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Feb- 
ruary 4, 1803. 

Printed at New York, 1803. Second edition, 
1807. In Longworth's "English and Ameri- 
can Stage," Vol. XXI, New York, c. 1808. In 
the "Dramatic Works of William Dunlap," 
Vol. II, New York, 1816. 

7 "The Wife of Two Husbands." (Pixere- 
court. ) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, April 
4, 1804. 

Printed at New York, 1804. Second edition, 
181 1. In Longworth's "English and Ameri- 
can Stage," Vol. Ill, New York, c. 1804. In 
the "Dramatic Works of William Dunlap," 
Vol. Ill, New York, 1816. 

8 "Nina." (Marsollier.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, De- 
cember 28, 1804. 



IMIiam 2DimIap'£ f©riting£ 2 9 1 

9 "Thirty Years; or, The Life of a Gamester." 
(Goubaux and Ducange.) 

Played at the Bowery Theatre, New York, 
February 22, 1828. 

b. From the German 

1 "The Stranger." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, De- 
cember 10, 1798. 

2 "Lovers' Vows." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, March 
11, 1799. 

Printed at New York, 181 4. In the "Dramatic 
Works of William Dunlap," Vol. Ill, New 
York, 1816. 

3 "Count Benyowski." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, April 
1, 1799. 

4 "Don Carlos." (Schiller.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, May 
6, 1799. 

5 "Indians in England." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, June 
14, 1799. 

6 "False Shame." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, De- 
cember 11, 1799. 

7 "The Wild Goose Chace." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Janu- 
ary 24, 1800. 

Printed as No. 1 of "The German Theatre" 
(Dunlap), New York, March, 1800. 



292 IBiHiam SDunlap 

8 "The Force of Calumny." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Feb- 
ruary 5, 1800. 

9 "The Virgin of the Sun." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, March 
12, 1800. 

Printed as No. II of "The German Theatre" 
(Dunlap), New York, March, 1800. 

io "Pizarro in Peru; or, The Death of Rolla." 
(Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, March 
26, 1800. 

Printed as No. Ill of "The German Theatre" 
(Dunlap), New York, May, 1800. 

11 "The Stranger's Birthday." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, April 
23, 1800. 

12 "Fraternal Discord." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Oc- 
tober 24, 1800. 

Printed at New York, 1809. In "Dramatic 
Works of William Dunlap," Vol. II, New 
York, 1816. 

13 "Abaellino, the Great Bandit." (Zschokke.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Feb- 
ruary 11, 1801. 

Printed at New York, 1802. Another edition, 
1803. So-called second edition, 1807. Third 
edition, 1814. Fourth edition, 1820. In Long- 
worth's "English and American Stage," Vol. 
I, New York, 1803 (?). In the "Dramatic 
Works of William Dunlao," Vol. Ill, New 
York, 1816. 



fMliam 2DunIa#'£ f©riting£ 293 

14 "Where Is He?" (Author unknown.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, De- 
cember 2, 1 80 1. 

15 "Peter the Great; or, The Russian Mother." 
(Babo.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, No- 
vember 15, 1802. 

Printed at New York, 1814. In the "Dramatic 
Works of William Dunlap," Vol. Ill, New 
York, 1816. 

16 "The Good Neighbor." (Iffland.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, Feb- 
ruary 28, 1803. 

Printed at New York, 1814. In the "Dramatic 
Works of William Dunlap," Vol. II, New 
York, 1816. 

17 "The Blind Boy." (Kotzebue.) 

Played at the Park Theatre, New York, March 
30, 1803. 

18 "La Perouse." (Kotzebue.) 

Unacted. 

Doubtful Attributions 

1 "Self-immolation; or, Family Distress." 
(Kotzebue.) 

2 "The Count of Burgundy." (Kotzebue.) 

3 "The Corsicans; or, The Dawnings of Love." 
(Kotzebue.) 

4 "Fiesco." (Schiller.) 

5 "Blue Beard; or, Female Curiosity." 

6 "The Africans." 

7 "Rinaldo Rinaldini." 



294 JBiliiam SDunlaj* 



Non-Dramatic Works 

"Ella — A Norwegian Tale." 

and 

"Cololoo— -An Indian Tale." 

In 'American Poems, Selected and Original," 
Vol. I, Litchfield (Connecticut, 1793). Also 
in ''The Columbian Muse, A Selection of 
American Poetry from Various Authors of 
Established Reputation," New York, 1794. 

"Memoirs of the Life of George Frederick 
Cooke." Two volumes. 

New York, 1813. London, 1813. London, 
second edition, 181 5. 

"The Monthly Recorder." 

New York, April to August, 181 3. Collected 
as "A Record, Literary and Political, of Five 
Months in the Year 181 3. By William Dun- 
lap and Others." 

A Supplement of 54 pages to Francis L. 
Clarke's "Life of Wellington." 
New York, 1814. 

"A Narrative of the Events which followed 
Bonaparte's Campaign in Russia to the Period 
of his Dethronement." 

Hartford, 1814. Also printed as 
A Supplement of 75 pages to Sir Robert Ker 
Porter's "Narrative of the Campaign in Rus- 
sia, During the Year 1812." 

Hartford, 1814. Second edition, 1815. 



J©illiam SDunia^ i©riting£ 295 

6 "The Life of Charles Brockden Brown." Two 
volumes. 

Philadelphia, 1815. London, 1822, — one vol- 
ume. 

7 "Description of Dunlap's Painting of Christ 
Rejected By the High Priests, Elders and 
People, When brought by Pilate from the 
Judgment Hall to the Pavement." 

Norfolk (1822). 

8 "Address to the Students of the National 
Academy of Design, at the Delivery of the 
Premiums, Monday, the 18th of April, 183 1." 

New York, 1831. London, "Library of the 
Fine Arts," 1832, Vol. IV, pp. 143-51. 

9 "A History of the American Theatre." 

New York, 1832. London, 1833, — two vol- 
umes. 

10 "History of the Rise and Progress of the Arts 
of Design in the United States." Two 
volumes. 

New York, 1834. 

11 "Gilbert Charles Stuart." A biographical 
sketch in the "National Portrait Gallery of 
Distinguished Americans," Vol. I. 

New York, 1834. Philadelphia, 1852. 

12 "Charles Brockden Brown." A biographical 
sketch in the "National Portrait Gallery of 
Distinguished Americans," Vol. III. 

New York, 1836. Philadelphia, 1852. 



296 i©ffliam SDmtfap 

13 "Thirty Years Ago; or, The Memoirs of a 
Water Drinker." Two volumes. 

New York, 1836. Reprinted as 

"Memoirs of a Water Drinker." Two vol- 
umes in one. 
New York, 1837. 

14 "A History of New York, for Schools." Two 
volumes. 

New York, 1837. Second edition, 1855. 

15 "History of the New Netherlands, Province of 
New York, and State of New York, to the 
Adoption of the Federal Constitution." Two 
volumes. 

New York, Vol. I, 1839; Vol. II, 1840. 

Contributions to Periodicals 

This list does not pretend to include all of Dun- 
lap's magazine and newspaper contributions. A 
complete bibliography is impossible because much 
of his work of this nature was, no doubt, published 
anonymously. Only signed articles or those to 
which he alluded in his Diary are included here. 

1 "The Zephyrs, An Idyl. (Translated from the 
German of Gesner, by W. Dunlap.)" 

"New York Magazine; or, Literary Reposi- 
tory," December, 1795, Vol. VI, p. 760. 

2 "First Idyl of Gesner. (Translated from the 
German by Wm. Dunlap.) Daphne— Chloe." 

"New York Magazine; or, Literary Reposi- 
tory," January, 1796, new series, Vol. I, p. 49. 



JMiiam 2Duntop V l^ritingg 297 

3 "On Innocence and Generosity." 

"New York Magazine; or, Literary Reposi- 
tory," October, 1797, new series, Vol. II, p. 
5i8. 

4 "Remarks on the Love of Country." 

"New York Magazine; or, Literary Reposi- 
tory," November, 1797, new series, Vol. II, 
p. 582. 

5 "Biographical Sketch of the Late Gilbert 
Stuart. [By William Dunlap, Esq.]" 

"Knickerbocker," April, 1833, Vol. I, p. 195. 

6 "Scraps and Miscellanies. By William Dun- 
lap, Esq." (a) "Thomas Dowse." (b) "Speci- 
men of Indian Eloquence." 

"Knickerbocker," May, 1833, Vol. I, pp. 281-4. 

7 "Boswell's Life of Johnson." 

"New York Mirror," September 14, 1833, Vol. 
XI, p. 82. 

8 "English Travellers." 

"New York Mirror," October 5, 1833, Vol. XI, 
p. in. 

9 Review of a medical book by Dr. William 

Beaumont. 
"Evening Star," October 10, 1833. 

10 "Memoir of Thomas Abthorpe Cooper." 

"New York Mirror," November 2, 1833, Vol. 

XI, p. 142. 

11 "The Ghost Murderer. By William Dunlap." 

"New York Mirror," January 17, 1835, Vol. 

XII, p. 225. 



298 JMIiam 2Dunlap 

12 "Proceedings of the American Lyceum. Es- 
say on the Influence of the Arts of Design; 
and the True Modes of Encouraging and Per- 
fecting Them. By William Dunlap." 

"American Monthly Magazine," February, 
1836, Vol. VII, p. 113. 

13 "Critical Hints." Signed "W. D." 

"American Monthly Magazine," May, 1836, 
Vol. VII, p. 502. 

14 "Tom Bell. A Tale of the Good Old Time. 
By William Dunlap." 

"New York Mirror," November 12, 1836, Vol. 
XIV, p. 157. 

15 "Tom Bell and the Princess Susannah Caro- 
lina Matilda. By William Dunlap." 

"New York Mirror," January 7, 1837, Vol. 

XIV, p. 217. 

16 "The Night Jumpers; or, The Yankee Tom 
and Jerry. By William Dunlap." 

"New York Mirror," July 1, 1837, Vol. XV, 
p. 2. 

17 "The Dancing Bear. Imitated from the Ger- 
man of Gellert, by William Dunlap, August, 
1799." 

"New York Mirror," July 8, 1837, Vol. XV, 
p. 10. 

18 "Mr. Catlin's Lectures. By William Dunlap." 

"New York Mirror," October 14, 1837, Vo1 - 

XV, p. 126. 

19 "The Vanity of Human Wishes. By William 
Dunlap." 

"New York Mirror," December 30, 1837, Vol. 
XV, p. 211. 






partial lijst of jmmlap'jS 
extant $amtings3 

The following catalogue is far from complete. 
Two facts have tended to scatter Dunlap's pictures 
widely, and to render them inaccessible : First, he 
practised his vocation all the way from Norfolk to 
Montreal. Second, the contents of his studio were 
sold at auction shortly after his death. Though 
the majority of his paintings are probably still in 
existence, it is now impossible to locate many of 
them. 

a. Miniatures 

1 Armitt Brown. 

Owned by Mrs. Fred Brown, Philadelphia. 

2 Charles Brockden Brown. 

Owned by the Brown family, Philadelphia. 

3 Charles Brockden Brown. 

Owned by Mr. Herbert Lee Pratt, New York 
City. 

4 Charles Brockden Brown. 

In the Lucy Wharton Drexel Collection, Pen- 
rynn, Penn. 

5 Mrs. Charles Brockden Brown. 

In the Lucy Wharton Drexel Collection, Pen- 
rynn, Penn. 

6-7 Two miniatures of George Frederick Cooke. 

Owned by The Players, New York City. 

299 



300 UMIiam 2Duniap 

8 Thomas Abthorpe Cooper. (Copied from 
Jarvis's oil portrait.) 

Owned by The Players, New York City. 

9 Margaret Dunlap. 

Owned by the Johnson family, Staten Island. 

io-ii Two miniatures of William Dunlap. 

Owned by Mrs. W. H. Carmalt, New Haven, 
Conn. 

12 Mrs. William Dunlap. 

Owned by Mrs. W. H. Carmalt, New Haven, 
Conn. 

13 Timothy Dwight. (By Dunlap?) 

Owned by Mrs. W. H. Carmalt, New Haven, 
Conn. 

14 President Tyler. 

Owned by Mr. Albert Rosenthal, Philadelphia. 

15 Mrs. Wignell. 

Owned by Prof. Theodore S. Woolsey, New 
Haven, Conn. 

16 Col. Hugh Williamson. 

Present location unknown. 

17 Francis Bayard Winthrop. 

Owned by the Johnson family, Staten Island. 

18 Mrs. Benjamin Woolsey, 1st. (Copied from 
an oil portrait by an unknown artist.) 

Owned by Mrs. W. H. Carmalt, New Haven, 
Conn. (?) 

19 Mrs. Benjamin Woolsey, 2nd. 

Owned by Mr. William S. Johnson, Mamaro- 
neck, New York. 



SDunlap'g <£)ttant $aintingg 30 1 

20 Capt. John Taylor Woolsey. (ByDunlap?) 

Owned by Mrs. W. H. Carmalt, New Haven, 
Conn. 

21 William Walton Woolsey. 

Owned by Mr. William S. Johnson, Mamaro- 
neck, New York. 

22-25 Four miniatures of unknown persons. 

Owned by Mr. Albert Rosenthal, Philadelphia. 



b. Oil Portraits 

Anthony Bleecker. 

Owned by the Society Library, New York City. 

Anthony Bleecker. 

Owned by Mrs. Fannie W. Neilson, Newburgh, 
New York. 

De Witt Clinton. 

Owned by the Brook Club, New York City. 

John Adams Conant. 

Owned by the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 
New York City. 

Mrs. John Adams Conant. 

Owned by the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 
New York City. 

Mrs. Thomas A. Cooper. 

Owned by the Cleveland Museum of Art, 
Cleveland, Ohio. 

Margaret Dunlap. 

Owned by Mrs. W. H. Carmalt, New Haven, 
Conn. 



302 UMIiam SDunlap 

8 The Artist showing a picture from "Hamlet" 
to his parents. 

Owned by the New York Historical Society, 
New York City. 

9-10 Two small portraits of Mrs. William Dun- 
lap. 

Owned by relatives of the family. 

11 Portrait of a Lady. 

Owned by the Worcester Art Museum, Worces- 
ter, Mass. 

12 Rev. Enoch M. Low. 

Present location unknown. 

13 Henry Seymour. 

Owned by the Misses Miller, Utica, New York. 

14 Mrs. Henry Seymour. 

Owned by Mrs. Walter G. Oakman, Islip, Long 
Island. 

15 Robert Snow. 

Owned by the Museum of the Brooklyn Insti- 
tute of Arts and Sciences. 

16 George Spalding. 

Owned by the Worcester Art Museum, Worces- 
ter, Mass. 

17 A group of six figures from "The Spy," in- 
cluding Harvey Birch. 

Owned by Mr. Albert Rosenthal, Philadelphia. 

18 Robert Taylor. 

At Rosewell, Whitemarsh; Virginia. 

19 Major David Van Horn. 

Owned by A. Van Horn Stuyvesant, New 
York City. 

20 Capt. Watson. 

Owned by the Ehrich Galleries, New York 
City. 



9!ntiey 



"Abaellino," 72, 85n, 87, 
239-40 

"Aballino der Grosse Ban- 
dit," 239 , 

"Abbe de l'Epee," 73, 8sn, 

197-8 
Adams, John and Samuel, 

132 
Addison, Joseph, 89, 130 
"Adelaide of Wulfingen," 

236 
"Adulateur, The," 132 
yEschylus, 145 
"Africans, The," 179, 180 
"Agamemnon," 145 
Albany, N. Y., 72, 83 
Allen, Paul, 247 
Allston, Washington, 96, 97, 

126, 259, 264 
American Academy of Fine 

Arts, 98, ioon, 104-6, no, 

260, 271 
American Company, 35, 36, 

39, 40, 44, 196 
"American Poems, Selected 

and Original," 25 
Amherst, Gen. Jeffrey, 3 
"Andre," 58, 62, 85n, 164-7, 

171, 172, 173, 184, 188 
Andre, Major John, 36, 163- 

6, 171, I72n, 267 
"Androborus," 129 
Annapolis, Md., 34 
"Anti-Jacobin, The," 57 
"Arabian Nights, The," 9 
"Archers, The," 28, 155-7, 

189, 191. (See "William 

Tell") 



Arnold, Benedict, 163, 164, 
171, 267 

"Articles of Agreement be- 
tween Hallam, Hodgkin- 
son, and Dunlap," 44-7 

Aston, Tony, 29 

"As You Like It," 59 

"Attack on the Louvre, 
The," in 

Babo, J. M., 240 
Baltimore, Md., 83 
Bannister, Charles, 12; 

John, 12, 78 
Barbary States, War with, 

150 
Barker, J. N., 187, i88n, 

i89n, I90n, 19m 
Barlow, Joel, 25, 83 
Barton, Andrew, 131 
Bartow, Thomas, 5 
Bath Theatre, 38 
"Battle of Brooklyn, The," 

133 
"Battle of Bunker's-Hill, 

The," 133, 145 
"Battle of Hexham, The," 

162, 163 
"Battle of New Orleans, 

The," 95, 174, 188 
Beach, L., i88n, i89n 
"Bearing of the Cross, The," 

103, in 
"Beaux' Stratagem, The," 8, 

30, 35, 129 
"Beggar's Opera, The," 132, 

I32n 
Betty, Master, 88 



303 






3<H 



Sfnfcejt: 



Bible, The, ioo 

Black Friars, 16 

Bleecker, Anthony, 17, i8n, 

103 
"Blind Boy, The," 74, 85n, 

230 
"Blue Beard," 179, 180 
Boaden, James, 153, 199 
Bonaparte, Jerome, 173 
Bonaparte, Napoleon, 174, 

250 
"Bonaparte in England," 78, 

85n, 113, 173-4, 179 
"Bon Ton," 140 
Boston, 23, 30, 36, 37, 55, 

58, 72, 83, 93, 102, 235 
Boswell, James, 121, 273 
Bouilly, Jean, 197, 198 
Bowery Theatre, 106-7, 109, 

113, 204 
Brackenridge, H. H., 133, 

186 
Breck, Charles, i88n 
Brevoort, Henry, 103 
Brown, C. B., 24, 28, 48, 51, 

57, 63, 69, 90, 100, no, 153, 

214, 247-9, 270, 281 
"Brown, Life of," 95, 247-9 
Brown, Elijah, 95 
Brown, T. A., 31 
Brown, William, i89n 
Brown University, 21 7n 
Bryant, W. C, 103, 109, 113, 

124, 125 
Buffalo, N. Y., 94 
Bulwer-Lytton, Edward, 121 
"Bunker Hill," 173 
Burgoyne, Gen. John, 36 
Burk, John, 173, 186, i89n, 

I90n 

Caigniez, L. C, 198, 199, 201 
"Caleb Williams," 161 
"Calvary/' 103, 106, 108, in 



"Careless Husband, The," 

134 
"Carmelite, The," 154 
Carr, Benjamin, 28 
"Castle of Andalusia, The," 

162, 163 
"Castle of Otranto, The," 

154 
"Castle Spectre, The," 154 
"Cato," 30, 89, 129, 130 
Chapel Street Theatre, New 

York, 34 
Charleston, S. C, 29, 30, 72, 

236 
Cheetham, James, 245 
"Christ Rejected," 101-2, 

108, in 
Cibber, Colley, 134, 251 
Clarke, F. L., 250 
"Clementine et Desormes," 

197 
Clinch, C. P., i89n, 19m 
Clinton, De Witt, 124 
Clinton, George, 83 
Cobb, James, 203 
Cockings, George, 131 
Cole, Thomas, 105, 126 
Colman, George, the 
Younger, 162, 179, 180, 
i8on, 207 
"Cololoo," 25 

"Columbian Muse, The," 25 
Columbia University, i8n 
"Commentaries on Ameri- 
can Law," i8n 
Conant, J. A., 124 _ 
Condorcet, Marquis de, 55 
Congreve, William, 34 
"Conquest of Canada," 131 
"Conscious Lovers, The," 

135 
"Contrast, The," 14, 16, 20, 

133, 137, 187, 236 
Cooke, G. F., 88-90, 92, 245- 



3[nbq: 



305 



246, 252, 275, 277, 27711, 
278, 281 

"Cooke, Memoirs of," 92-3, 

234, 244-7, 249, 278 
Cooper, J. F., 26, 103, 112, 

120, mi, 255, 258 
Cooper, T. A., 61, 62, 65, 66, 

69, 73, 74, 77, 79, 84, 87, 

88, 90, 91, 118, 175, 238, 278 
Cooper, Mrs. T. A., 124 
Copley, J. S., 11, 96, 126 
"Corsicans, The," 226 
Cotton, John, 244 
"Count Benyowski," 66, 85n, 

215, 235, 236 
"Count of Burgundy, The," 

221 
"Count of Narbonne, The," 

154 
Covent Garden Theatre, 48, 

50, 88, 162, 207 
"Critic, The," 12 
Croswell, Joseph, i89n 
Cruger's Wharf Theatre, 

New York, 33 
Cruikshank, George, H2n 
Cumberland, Richard, 135, 

154, i87n 
"Curfew, The," I58n 
Custis, G. W. P., i89n 

"Darby's Return," 21, 85n, 

142-3, 150, 179, 188, 189 
"Death of Montgomery, 

The," 133, 145 
"Death on the Pale Horse," 

103, 108, in 
Decatur, Capt. Stephen, 151 
Defoe, Daniel, 121 
Dekker, Thomas, 167, 168, 

169, 282 
D'Elville, Rinaldo, igon 
Dennie, Joseph, 270 
"Deserteur, Le," 196 



Diary, Dunlap's, 53, 54, 57, 
58, 6in, 90, 98, 117, 118, 
120, 272, 278 

Dibdin, Thomas, 194, I96n, 
207, 220, 228 

Diorama, The, 107-8, 176 

"Disappointment, The," 131, 

134 

"Distressed Mother, The," 
194 

Doddridge, Joseph, 19m 

"Don Carlos," 67, 238 

"Don Juan," 100 

"Douglas," 88, 146 

Douglass, David, 33, 34, 36 

Drama League of America, 
62n 

"Dramatic Works of Wil- 
liam Dunlap, The," 85 

Drone Club, I9n 

Drury Lane Theatre, 48, 
179, 207 

Ducange, Victor, 204 

Dunlap, Hester, 24 

Dunlap, John A., 24, 53-4, 
56, 92, n8n, 127, 252, 267, 
272 

Dunlap, Margaret, 24, 53-4, 
119, 121 

Dunlap, Samuel, 3, 4, 5, 7, 
11, 13, 22, 23 

Dunlap, Mrs. Samuel, 4, 98n. 
(See Margaret Sargeant) 

Dunlap, William, parentage 
and birth, 3-4; education, 
4-8; during the Revolu- 
tion, 6-9 ; loss of eye, 8-9 ; 
first attempts at drama 
and art, 9-10 ; residence in 
England, n-14; early 
plays, 15-28 ; marriage, 
16-17; mercantile pur- 
suits, 22-3 ; director of 
New York theatre, 28-9, 



306 



%nbtx 



43-81 ; playwriting and 
translating, 49-79; bank- 
ruptcy, 79-80; estimate of 
his ability as a director, 
80-1 ; itinerant painting, 
82-3 ; second connection 
. with the theatre, 84-91 ; 
literary ventures, 92-5 ; 
state office, 94-5; main 
period of professional 
painting, 95-121 ; found- 
ing of the National Acad- 
emy, 104-6; illness and 
operation, 118-9; list of 
his contributions to ex- 
hibitions of the National 
Academy, I22n ; estimate 
of his ability as a painter, 
94, 123-5 J historical writ- 
ing, 95, 112, 1 1 7-9, 12 1-2, 
126; death, 127; estimate 
of his character, 127-8; 
see "Contents" for treat- 
ment of his works; gen- 
eral estimate of his 
achievements, 280-3 

Dunlap, Mrs. William, 54, 
101, 119, 127. (See Eliza- 
beth Woolsey) 

Durand, A. B., 105, 126 

Dutton, Thomas, 224 

Duyckinck, Evert, 21 

D wight, Timothy, 17, 58 

Edgeworth, Maria, 121 
"Edle Luge, Die," 226 
"Edwin and Angelina," 163, 

190 
"Ella," 26 

Ellison, James, 15m 
Ellison, R. W., 239 

Epee, Charles-Michel, Abbe 

de 1', 197 
"Epigramm, Das," 230 



"Falsche Scham," 217 
"False Shame," 68, 85n, 217, 

235 
Farquhar, George, 43 
"Fatal Deception, The," 25, 

143. (See "Leicester") 
"Father, The," 19-20, 86, 

137-42, 143, 170, 183, 187. 

(See "The Father of an 

Only Child") 
"Father of an Only Child, 

The," 85m 141, 253. (See 

"The Father") 
Fawcett, J., 231 
Federal Constitution, 21, 267 
"Federalist, The," i8n 
Federalist Party, 142 
"Femme a Deux Maris, La," 

202 
"Ferdinand Count Fathom," 

100 
"Fiesco," 238 
Fitch, Clyde, i64n 
Fitzball, Edward, 106, 107 
"Flying Dutchman, The," 

106, I07n 
"Fontainville Abbey," 26-7, 

85n, 151-5, 158, 190, 191 
"Fontainville Forest," 153 
"Force of Calumny, The," 

70, 85n, 220-1 
Forrest, Edwin, 113, 257n 
Forrest, Col. Thomas, 13m 
"Forty and Twenty," 85n. 

181 
Francis, Dr. J. W., 119, 125, 

247, 278 
"Fraternal Discord," 71, 

85n, 87, 228-9, 234, 236, 

242 
"Freedom of the Seas, 

The," 91 
French Revolution, 142, 206 
Freneau, Philip, 25 



3[n&eje 



307 



Friendly Club, 17-19, 24 
Fulton, Robert, 258 

Gallatin, Albert, 84 
"Gambler's Fate, The," 107, 

204 
"Gamester, The," 204 
Garrick, David, 140 
Geisweiler, Maria, 226 
Genest, John, 140, 141, 223 
"George Barnwell," 30, 129 
"German Theatre, The," 69, 

70 
Gessner, Solomon, 27 
Gibbon, Edward, 121 
"Glory of Columbia, The," 

74, 85n, 171-3, 177, 179, 

184, 188, 189 
Godfrey, Thomas, 129, 130, 

186 
Godwin, William, 57, 61, 

161, 163, 272 
Goldsmith, Oliver, 15 
"Good Neighbor, The," 74, 

85n, 87, 241 
Goubaux, Prosper, 204 
"Graf von Burgund, Der," 

221 
Grice, C. E., 95n, i89n 
Gunning, Elizabeth, 202, 203 

Hallam Company, 32, 129, 

252 
Hallam, Lewis, 1st, 32-3 
Hallam, Lewis, 2d, 15, 19, 

29, 36, 38, 39, 43, 44~7, 

50-1, 53, 63, 63n, 252 
Hallam, Mrs. Lewis, 43, 50, 

51, 63n 
Hallam, William, 32 
Halleck, Fitzgreene, 103, 

113 
Hamilton, Alexander, i8n 
"Hamlet," 37, 61 



Hancock, John, 132 
"Happy Family, The," 227 
Hartford, Conn., 47, 55, 250 
Harwood, J. E., 78 
Hatton, Ann, i89n 
Hawkins, Micah, igon 
Hawks, F. L., 265, 266 
Haymarket Theatre, 48, 180 
"Helvetic Liberty," 156 
Henderson, John, 12 
Henkels, S. V., 94 
Henry, John, 15, 19, 35, 36, 

38, 194, 196 
Henry, Mrs. John, 15, 19 
Hewetson, W. B., 23on 
Hewit, James, 72 
"Highland Reel, The," 150 
Hill, Aaron, 194 
Hillhouse, J. A., ioxtn, 19m 
"Historic Muse, The," I23n 
"History of the American 
Theatre," 109, 112, 137, 
159, 167, 179, 180, 216, 221, 
226, 233, 251-7, 261, 278 
"History of the New Neth- 
erlands, Province of New 
York, and State of New 
York," 125, 126, 266-9 
"History of New York, for 

Schools," 122, 265-6 
"History of the Rise and 
Progress of the Arts of 
Design in the United 
States," 117, 118, 119, 122, 

257-64 

Hodgkinson, John, 25, 26, 
28, 29, 38, 39, 41, 43, 44-7, 
49, 50-i, 52, 53, 55, 56, 58, 
59, 62, 63, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 
74, 75, 77-8, 159, 190 

Hodgkinson, Mrs. John, 26, 
38 

Holcroft, Thomas, 54, 57, 
157, 198, 201, 202, 207 



3 o8 



Stnfcejc 



Home, John, 145 

"Honest Whore, The," 167, 

168, 170 
Hosack, David, 116, 117 
Hudson, Henry, 266, 267 
Hugo, Victor, 121 
Hull, Capt. Isaac, 175 
Hume, David, 54 
"Humphrey Clinker," 100 
Humphreys, David, i88n, 

194 
Hunter, Gov. Robert, 129 
Hutton, Joseph, i88n, igon 

Iffland, A. W., 74, 206, 241 
Inchbald, Mrs. Elizabeth, 

213, 214 
"Indians in England," 67, 

85n, 215 
Ingersoll, C. J., I90n 
Ingham, Charles, 105, 122, 

126 
Inman, Henry, 105, 126 
"Inquirer, The," 57 
Ioor, William, i89n 
Ireland, J. N., 20, 196, 221, 

226, 254 
"Irene," 130 
Irving, Peter, 92, 93 
Irving, Washington, 75, 76, 

92, 120, 258 
Isham, Samuel, 264 
"Is It a Lie?", i82n 
"Italian Father, The," 67, 

8sn, 87, 167-70, 184, 187 
"Ivanhoe," 100 

Jarvis, J. W., 126, 259 

Jefferson, Joseph, 1st, 48, 66, 

7i 
Jefferson, Joseph, 3d, 48n 
Jefferson, Thomas, 83 
Jephson, Robert, 154 
"Jerome Pointu," 195 



Johnson, Mr. and Mrs. 

John, 48 
Johnson, Samuel, 130, 

273-4 
Johnson, William, 17, i8n, 

24,63 
John Street Theatre, New 

York, 28, 35, 36, 38, 48, 

50, 53, 56, 58, 59 
Jones, J., 15m 
Jordan, Mrs. Dorothea, 12 
Judah, Moses, 23, 56 
Judah, S. B. H., i89n, I90n, 

19m 
"Jugement de Salomon, Le," 

198, 201 
"Julius Caesar," 130 

"Kabale und Liebe," 206 

Kelly, Hugh, 134 

Kemble, Charles and Fanny, 
"3 

Kemble, J. P., 12, 88 

Kent, James, 17, i8n, 83 

"Kind der Liebe, Das," 207 

"King John," 61 

King's College, 8 

Kip Street Theatre, New 
York, 31 

"Knight of Guadalquiver, 
The," 72, 85n, 189 

"Knight's Adventure, The," 
85n, 159, 163, 190, 191. 
(See "The Man of Forti- 
tude") 

Kotzebue, A. F. F. von, 65, 
66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 74, 
88, 108, 189, 198, 205-37, 
252; plays on the London 
stage, 208-9; plays on the 
New York stage, 231-2 

"Ladies of Castile, The," 
136, 145 



Slnber 



309 



Lamb, Charles, 282 
"La Perouse," 8511, 231 
Lathy, T. P., i88n 
Lawrence, James, 222 
Lee, Nathaniel, 130 
"Leicester," 85n, 143-9, 154, 
183, 191. (See "The Fatal 
Deception") 
Leslie, C. R., 271 
Lessing, G. E., 205, 206 
"Letters of Jonathan Old- 
style, Gent.," 75-6 
Lewis, M. G., 154, 207, 224, 

239 
"Lewis of Monte Blanco," 

78, 85n, 179 
Lexington, Battle of, 175 
"Liberal Opinions," 74 
Lillo, George, 43, 206 
Lindsley, A. B., i88n 
London, 11, 92, 95, 112 
Longworth, David, 86, 87, 92 
"Lovers' Vows," 66, 85n, 87, 

207, 208, 213-15, 234 
Low, Samuel, 136 
Ludger, C., 228 
Lunch Club, 103 

"Macbeth," 144, 145 
McKee, Thomas, 216, 221, 

226, 227, 238 
McLean, Dr., 119, 278 
MacNally, Leonard, 162 
Madison, Mrs. James, 83 
Malbone, Edward, 82, 83 
Manfredi, Signor, J7 
"Man of Fortitude, The," 
52, 150-63. (See "The 
Knight's Adventure") 
Manumission Society, 23 
Markoe, Peter, 133, i£>9n 
Marriott, Mrs., i89n 
Marsollier, Joseph, 203 
Masons, 16 



"Massachusetts Magazine, 

The," 269 
Mather, Cotton and Samuel, 

245 
Matthews, Brander, 164, 

166, 184 
Melmoth, Mrs., 48 
"Memoirs of a Water 

Drinker," 117, 276-9. (See 

"Thirty Years Ago") 
"Menschenhass und Reue," 

205, 207, 211 
"Merchant of Venice, The," 

32 
Mercier, L. S., 196, I96n 
Merry, Mrs. Robert, 73, 86. 

(See Mrs. Thomas Wig- 

nell) 
"Merry Gardener, The," 

73, 85n 
Michaux, Dr. Pierre, 49, 50 
Miller, Edward, 271; Sam- 
uel, 17, i8n 
Milne's "All in a Bustle," 59 
"Minna von Barnhelm," 205, 

206 
Minshull, John, i88n, i8c>n 
"Miser's Wedding, The," 25 
"Miss Sara Sampson," 205, 

206 
Mitchill, S. L., 12, 16, 17, 

i8n, 51, 56, 83, 271 
"Modest Soldier, The," 15, 

137 
Moliere, J. B. P. de, 121 
Moncrieff, William, 107 
"Monthly Magazine, and 

American Review, The," 

214, 220, 221, 223, 225, 228, 

238, 270 
"Monthly Recorder, The," 

93, 270-2 
Montreal, Canada, 100, 101 
Monvel, Boutet de, 197 



3io 



Sntiq: 



Moore, Edward, 204 
Morris, G. P., 113, 115, 125 
Morse, Jedidiah, 58 
Morse, S. F. B., 96, 97, 103, 

105, in, 126, 259 
Murdock, J., i88n 
"Mysterious Monk, The," 

49, 157. (See "Ribbe- 

mont") 

Napoleon. (See Bonaparte) 

Napoleonic Wars, History 
of, 95, 250-1, 268 

"Narrative of the Events 
which followed Bona- 
parte's Campaign in Rus- 
sia," 250 

Nassau Street Theatre, New 
York, 32 

National Academy of De- 
sign, 105-6, 108, 109, no, 
in, 117, 121, 122, I22n, 
260, 263 

"National Portrait Gallery, 
The," 117, 249n, 259n 

"Natural Daughter, The," 
66, 187 

"Natural Son, The," 135, 
18711, 214 

Neal, John, I90n 

"Negersklaven, Die," 207 

Neuman, Henry, 216, 217 

Newport, R. I., 34 

New Theatre, New York, 
53, 59-60, 63, 64-5. (See 
Park Theatre) 

New York City, 6, 7, 30, 31, 
32, 36, 39, 61, 81, 91, 97, 
104 

New York Drawing Asso- 
ciation, 105 

New York Historical So- 
ciety, 15, i8n 

"New York Magazine, 
The," 27, 269, 272 



"New York Mirror, The," 

128, 185, 273, 275 
Niagara Falls, 95 
"Nina," 79n, 85n, 203-4 
Noah, M. M./i5in, iSgn, 

19m 
Norfolk, Va., 98, 100, 101, 

102 
Norton, John, 244, 245 

O'Keeffe, John, 142, 150, 

162 
"Opfertod, Der," 216 
"Orphan, The," 30, 37 
Otis, James, 132 
Otway, Thomas, 34, 43, 211 
Oxford University, 12, 13, 

278 

Paine, R. T., 278 
Paine, Thomas, 245 
Papendick, George, 211 
Park Theatre, New York, 
64-5, 69, 73, 78, 79, 81, 84, 
87, 88, 89, 91, 106, 107, 
113, 181, 204, 217, 223, 224, 
226, 231, 238, 276, 278. 
(See New Theatre) 
"Patrick in Prussia," 142 
"Patriot Chief, The," 133, 

145 
Paulding, J. K., 113 
Payne, J. H., 88, 93, 15m, 

187, i88n, I90n, 19m, 243 
Peale, Rembrandt, 105 
Pelisier, Victor, 66 
Pepys, Samuel, 121 
Perth Ambov, 3, 4, 6, 25, 48, 

53, 56, 57, 63, 68, 80, 84, 89, 

91, 127 
"Peter the Great," 74, 85n. 

87, 240-1 
Philadelphia, 23, 30, 33, 36, 

37, 38, 39, 51, 72, 83, 85, 89, 

90, 95, 102, 235 



3[nbejc 



311 



Philips, Ambrose, 194 
Philological Society, 16, 17 
"Pioneers, The," 177 
Pixerecourt, Guilbert de, 

200, 202 
"Pizarro," 70, 8511, 207, 208, 

224-5, 234, 236 
Plumptre, Anne, 213, 214, 

221, 222, 223, 224, 231 
"Political Justice," 57 
"Politician Outwitted, The," 

136 
"Ponteach," 130, 131 
"Poor Soldier, The," 142 
Porter, Sir Robert K., 250 
Porter, Stephen, 213 
"Port Folio, The," 270 
"Portrait of a Lady," 124, 

125 
Post, Dr. Wright, 49 
Price, Stephen, 87, 88, 89 
"Prince of Parthia, The," 

129-30, 133,. 145 
Princeton University, i8n 
"Proverb, The," 78, 8sn, 174 

Quebec, 100; Battle of, 3; 

Battle-field of, 101, 278 
Quincy, Josiah, 58 

Radcliffe, Mrs. Ann, 153, 

154, 161 
"Rauber, Die," 161, 162, 163, 

205 
"Recruiting Officer, The," 30 
Reinagle, A., 38, 39, 55, 61 
Render, Wilhelm, 215 
"Retrospect, The," 73 
Revolutionary War, 6-9, 36, 
132, 163, 175, 260, 266, 267 
Reynolds, Sir Joshua, 101, 

126 
"Ribbemont; or, The Feu- 
dal Baron," 85n, 157-9, 
190, 191. (See "The Mys- 
terious Monk") 



"Richard III," 37, 89, 129 
"Rinaldo Rinaldini," 180-1, 

I90n 
Rittenhouse, David, 205 
"Robbers, The," 162, 237, 

239 
"Robbery, The," 69, 85n, 197 
"Robespierre," 181 
Robin, Augustus, ion 
Robineau, A. L. B., 195 
"Robin Hood," 162, 163 
Rogers, Major Robert, 131 
"Romance of the Forest, 

The," 153, 154. 
"Romeo and Juliet," 77, 129, 

130 
Rousseau, J. J., 99 
Rowe, Nicholas, 43, 211 
Rowson, Mrs. Susannah, 

150, 155, 186, i88n, i89n, 

19m 
Rubens, P. P., 13, 101 

"Sack of Rome, The," 136, 

145 
St. Pierre, Charles, 272, 273 
Sargeant, Margaret, 3, 4. 

(See Mrs. Samuel Dun- 
lap) 
Schiller, Friedrich, 67, 161, 

163, 205, 206, 236, 237-8, 

243, 252 
Schinck, A., 211 
"School for Lovers," 135 
"School for Scandal," 12, 64 
"School for Soldiers," 67, 

72, 85n, 194, 196 
"School for Wives," 134 
Scott, Walter, 255 
Sedaine, M. J., i96n 
Seilhamer, G. O., 52, 53, 254, 

255-6 
"Self-immolation," 216-7, 

236 



312 



'Jn&ej; 



Sewall, Chief Justice Sam- 
uel, 30 

Seward, Honora, 165 

Shakespeare, William, 6, 34, 
41, 43, 53, 88, 89, 130, 144, 
145, 152, 159, 205, 210, 211, 
282 

Shelley, Mrs. Mary, 121 

"Shelty's Travels," 25, 150-1 

Sherid'an, R. B., 184, 207, 
211, 224, 225 

"She Stoops to Conquer," 

15,37 

Siddons, Mrs. Sarah, 12 
"Silberne Hochzeit, Die," 

2.2.7 
Sketch Club, 109 
''Slaves in Algiers," 150, 155 
Smith, Charles, 198, 217, 219, 

220, 221, 222, 224, 227, 235 ; 

list of his translations, 

2i9n 
Smith, E. H., 17, i8n, 24, 25, 

28, 51, 59, 63, 163, i89n, 

190 
Smith, J. S., 15m 
Society Library*, New York, 

223, 227 
"Soldier of '76, The," 72, 

85n, 188 
Solee, John. 55, 56 
Sonneck, O. G., 29, 157 
"Sophonisba," 130 
South Street Theatre, Phila- 
delphia, I72n 
Spalding, George, 124, 125 
"Spanier in Peru, Die," 207 
Steele, Richard, 135 
Sterne, Laurence, 139, 170 
"Sterne's Maria," 66, 85n, 

170-1, 187, 189 
Stokes. J., I90n 
"Stranger, The," 65, 70, 85n, 

207, 208, 210, 211-13, 214, 

226, 234, 236, 239 



"Stranger's Birthday, The," 

70, 85 n, 226 
"Strelizen, Die," 240-1 
Stuart, Gilbert, 83, 94, 96, 

97, 125, 126, 259, 264 
Sully, Thomas, 96, 98, 125, 

126, 259, 264 

Talbot, Charles, ioxin 
"Tale of Mystery, A," 201, 

202 
Tell, William, 28, 155-6 
"Tell Truth and Shame the 

Devil," 50, 85n, 194-5 
"Temple of Independence, 

The," 66, 188 
Theatre Frangais, 197 
"Theodosius," 130 
"Thirty Years Ago," 121, 

276-9. (See "Memoirs of 

a Water Drinker") 
"Thirty Years ; or, The Life 

of a Gamester," 107, 204 
Thomas, Isaiah, 25m 
Thompson, Benjamin, 198, 

211, 222, 227, 231 
Thomson, Alexander, 216 
Thomson, James, 130 
Tisdale, E., 259 
Tobin, John, I58n 
"Tom Jones," 100 
Tompkins, Gov. Daniel, 278 
"Trente Ans ou la Vie dun 

Joueur," 204 
"Trip to Niagara, A," 107-8, 

176-9, 183, 188 
"Tristram Shandy," 170 
Trumbull, John, 96, 98, 104, 

105, 126, 260-1, 263, 264 
Turnbull, J. D., I90n 
Turrell, Ebenezer, 245 
Twaits, William, 278 
"Twelfth Night," 169 
Tvler, Rovall, 15, 16, 133-6, 

178, 186, 187, 236 



Sn&ejc 



313 



Tytler, A. R, 162 

Vanderlyn, John, 97, 263 
Van Home, John, 9, 10, 11 
"Venice Preserved," 113 
"Verlaumder, Die," 220 
Verplanck, Gulian, 125 
"Versohnung, Die," 228 
"Virgin of the Sun, The," 

70, 85n, 222-4 
"Voice of Nature, The," 74, 

85n, 87, 198-202 
Voltaire, F. M. A. de, 58 

Walpole, Horace, 121, 154 
War of 1812, 91, 174, 178 
Warren, Gen. Joseph, 132 
Warren, Mrs. Mercy, 132, 

136, 186 
Washington, D. C, 83, 103 
Washington, George, 10, 11, 

18, 21, 65, 69, 133, 165, 172, 

245, 266, 279 
Washington, Mrs. Martha, 

10 
Watson, John, 258 
Watterson, George, i88n 
Webster, Noah, 16 
Wegelin, Oscar, i82n, 216, 

221, 226 
Weir, R. W., 126 
Wellington, Duke of, 250 
Wells, John, 17, i8n 
Weems, M. L., 245 
West, Benjamin, 11, 12, 14, 

96, 97, 101, 102, 103, 123, 

126, 258, 259, 260, 264, 282 
West, Raphael, 12, 258 
Westray, Ellen, 68 
"Where Is He?", 73, 85n 
White, J. B., i89n, i9on 
White, W. C, i88n 
Whitehead, William, 135 



"Widow of Malabar, The," 

194 
"Wife of Two Husbands, 

The," 78, 85n, 87, 179, 

202-3 
"Wife with Two Husbands, 

The," 202 
Wignell, Thomas, 19, 21, 38, 

39, 55, 61, 142 
Wignell, Mrs. Thomas, 85. 

(See Mrs. Merry) 
"Wildfang, Der," 218, 219 
"Wild Goose Chace, The," 

69, 70, 85n, 178, 189, 218- 

20, 235, 242 
Wilkens, F. H., 180, 205 
Williamsburg, Va., 30, 32, 

34 
"William Tell," 85n. (See 

"The Archers") 
Winstanley, W., l88n 
Wolfe, Gen. James, 3, 133 
Wood, W. B., 247, 252 
Woodworth, Samuel, 187, 

i89n, igon, 19m 
Woolsey, Benjamin, 17 
Woolsey, Elizabeth, 17. (See 

Mrs. William Dunlap) 
Woolsey, Theodore D., i8n 
Woolsey, T. S., 94, 95n 
Woolsey, W. W., 17, i8n 
Worcester Art Museum, 125 

Yale University, 17, i8n, 94, 

204 
"Yankee Chronology," 92, 

174-6, 179, 183 
"Yankee Tars," 92 
Yorktown, Battle of, 74-5, 

172, 175 

"Zara," 194 

Zschokke, J. H. D., 72, 239 



<■ 









^■ 






Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Sept. 2009 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN COLLECTIONS PRESERVATION 

111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 1 6056 
(724)779-2111 




006 011020 



7 O 












H 



■_ 



■ 




■ 



^m 



m 



H 



xw 



